RAJ KUMAR GUPTA @ CHINTU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010237452026 2026:CGHC:46900
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 1482 of 2026
• Raj Kumar Gupta @ Chintu Son Of Dashrath Prasad Gupta, Aged About
21 Years Resident Of Village Pakriha, Gram Panchayat Lamatola, Police
Station Kotma, District Anuppur (M.P.) (Wrongly Mentioned As C.G.)
... Appellant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Of
•
Police Station A J A K, Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate
For State : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Government Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
05.11.2026
1.
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 22.05.2026 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities),
Surajpur and for grant of regular bail to the appellant, who has been
arrested in connection with Crime No. 197/2025, registered at Police

2
Station- AJAK Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence
punishable under Sections 69, 296 (B), 351(2) of BNS and Section 3 (2)
(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. As per case of the prosecution, a written case was lodged by victim at
Police Station Surajpur on 31.03.2026 making allegation against the
applicant that he sexually exploited her on pretext of marriage between
06.12.2024 to 28.01.2026 and subsequently refused to marry. It is also
alleged that the appellant and victim visited hotels on many occasions
where she was forcefully sexually exploited. It is also alleged that the
appellant committed said offence knowing very well the fact that victim
is a member of Scheduled Caste category. On such complaint, police
registered offences as stated above.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would argue that on date of
incident, victim was aged about 21 years and she was a mature lady, well
aware of the consequences of such relationship. It is further submitted
that there was consensual relationship between them and victim
voluntarily visited hotels along with the appellant on several occasions.
He would submit that charge-sheet has been filed, appellant is in jail
since 06.05.2026 and he has no criminal antecedents. Thus, he would
pray for grant of bail to the present appellant.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose.
Mr. Sharad Mishra, Government Advocate would submit that present
applicant on pretext of marriage sexually exploited a girl belonging to
Scheduled Caste community and there are serious allegations against the
appellant, and therefore, this appeal deserves to be dismissed.

3
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the
case diary.
6.
Perusal of the contents of FIR and statement of the victim recorded
under Section 183 of BNSS would make it clear that there was a fair
degree of intimacy between the appellant and victim, which continued
for period from 06.12.2024 to 28.01.2026. It is apparent from perusal of
the documents that victim visited hotels along with the appellant on
06.12.2024, 09.12.2024, 30.12.2025 and 28.01.2026. Further, taking note
of the fact that charge-sheet has been filed, applicant has no criminal
antecedents and he is languishing in jail since 06.05.2026, without
commenting on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this appeal.
The order dated 22.05.2026 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities),
Surajpur in B.A. No. 233/2026 is hereby set-aside. Accordingly, instant
criminal appeal is allowed.
7. 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
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, &

4
(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