Chhattisgarh HC Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Caste Abuse And Assault, Noting SC/ST Act Charges Were Added With Charge-Sheet

In brief

The question

1. Whether the appellant should be released on regular bail, having regard to the circumstances of the case, including the timing of addition of the SC/ST Act offences, completion of the investigation, custody, and likely duration of trial.

The court held

The appeal was allowed, and the Special Judge’s order dated 17 September 2026 was set aside.

It also directed

The appellant was directed to be released on a personal bond with two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to conditions concerning adjournments, attendance, appearance at specified trial stages, and consequences for misuse of bail.

The Court further requested the trial court to endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously.

01Facts

The complainant, a Janpad Panchayat member, alleged that on 18 May 2026, while attempting to stop bridge construction, the appellant and others abused him by reference to his caste and assaulted him with a wooden plank.

¶ 2

The FIR initially invoked offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS); offences under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v-a) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 were added when the charge-sheet was filed.

¶ 2

The Special Judge rejected the appellant’s regular-bail application.

¶ 1

The appellant appealed under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act, submitting that the caste-abuse allegation was false, the injuries were simple, he had no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet had been filed, and he had been in custody since 17 September 2026.

¶ 3

The State opposed bail, relying on the alleged caste-based abuse and head injuries.

¶ 4

02Issues

i.1. Whether the appellant should be released on regular bail, having regard to the circumstances of the case, including the timing of addition of the SC/ST Act offences, completion of the investigation, custody, and likely duration of trial.

¶ 3–6

ii.2. Whether the Special Judge’s order rejecting bail should be set aside.

¶ 1, 6–7

03Law Applied

Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act provides the appellate route invoked to challenge the Special Judge’s order.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), cited in the proceedings, concerns the power to grant regular bail.

In deciding the application, the Court considered the circumstances identified in the record, including the stage at which the SC/ST Act offences were added, filing of the charge-sheet, the appellant’s custody, and the anticipated time for conclusion of trial.

¶ 1, 6

The Court cited no precedent and expressed no opinion on the merits.

Provisions in the judgment · 13 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 3

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483 Section 84 Section 351

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 9 provisions

Section 296 Section 351 Section 115 Section 3 Section 126 Section 324 Section 117 Section 269 Section 209

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the SC/ST Act offences were not included when the FIR was lodged but were added at the charge-sheet stage.

¶ 4–6

It also considered that the charge-sheet had been filed, the appellant had remained in custody since 17 September 2026, and trial was likely to take time.

¶ 4–6

On those combined grounds, and without assessing the merits of the allegations or the competing claims about the injuries, the Court found bail appropriate.

¶ 4–6