RAJAT JOSHI@ Rajju vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010390302026 2026:CGHC:46899
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 2529 of 2026
Rajat Joshi@ Rajju S/o Shri Krishna Lal Joshi Aged About 33 Years R/o
•
Gurugovind Singh Ward, In Front Of Manav Sangrahaly Dharmpura,
Jagadalpur, P.S. Bodhghat, Distt. Bastar, Chhattisgarh.
... Appellant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Adim Jati Kalyan
•
Thana Kotwali, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate
For State : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastva, Dy. Advocate General
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
05.11.2026
1. Victim appeared through virtual mode and raised serious objection in
grant of bail to the appellant.
2.
The appellant has preferred this Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(2)
of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside of
order dated 19.08.2026 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities),
Bastar(Jagdalpur) and for grant of regular bail to the appellant, who has
been arrested in connection with Crime No. 02/2026, registered at Police

2
Station- AJAK, Jagdalpur District Bastar (C.G.) for the offence
punishable under Section 64 of BNS and Section 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
3. As per the case of the prosecution, FIR was lodged by the victim on
11.06.2026 against the appellant, alleging that she belongs to Scheduled
Tribe community and is working on the post of Peon in Agricultural
Department. There was a love affair and cordial relationship between the
appellant and victim. It is further alleged that appellant assured her of
th
marriage and subsequently, they shifted to a rented house on 18
February, 2026, where they stayed till 07.06.2026. It is also alleged that
during said period, the appellant sexually exploited her on pretext of
marriage. It is further alleged that appellant is a married person. There is
also an allegation of physical assault. On such complaint, police
registered offence as stated above.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would argue that there was a
love affair between the appellant and victim; therefore, provisions of
Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, would
not attract. It is further argued that appellant and victim were known to
each other since 2013. He further submits that in her statement recorded
under Section 183 of BNSS, she has categorically stated that she was
aware of the fact that appellant was married and subsequently divorced.
It is also argued that victim stayed along with the appellant in a rented
house for a period of three months and there was a consensual
relationship between them. Thus, he would pray for grant of bail to the
present appellant.

3
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose
the prayer. Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, learned Deputy Advocate General
would submit that present appellant, on false pretext of marriage,
sexually exploited the victim, who belongs to Scheduled Tribe
community. It is also contended that there are serious allegations against
the appellant, and therefore, this appeal deserves to be dismissed.
6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the
case diary.
7. Having considered fact that victim is a mature lady aged about 34 years
and she is a Government servant; she was well aware of the
consequences of such relationship, particularly when the marital status of
the appellant was within her knowledge; she voluntarily stayed along
with the appellant in a rented house for about 2-3 months. Further,
charge-sheet has been filed, appellant has no criminal antecedents and
trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, without making
any observation on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this
appeal. The order dated 19.08.2026 passed by the Special Judge
(Atrocities) Bastar Place - Jagdalpur in Special Case No. 05/2026 is
hereby set-aside. Accordingly, instant criminal appeal is allowed.
8. It is directed that, in the event of the appellant executing a personal bond
in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the
concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following
conditions:-
(i) he shall not directly or indirectly make
any inducement, threat or promise to any

4
person acquainted with the facts of the
case so as to dissuade him from disclosing
such fact to the Court,
(ii) he shall not act in any manner which
will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious
trial, &
(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court
on each and every date given to them by
the said Court till disposal of the trial.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE
$iddhant