Rahul Gupta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR (Proceedings through Video Conferencing) Cr.A. No. 395 of 2021 Rahul Gupta S/o Rajeshwar Prasad Kumar Gupta, aged about 27 years R/o Village Chalgali, Police Station Chalgali, District Balrampur (C.G.) ---- Appellant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Station House Officer of Police Station Ambikapur, District Ambikapur (C.G.) ---- State/Non-Applicant AND Cr.A. No. 424 of 2021 Lavkush Sharma S/o Rajendra sharma, aged about 20 years R/o Mahamaya Gate (Behind Indravatika Bhawan) P.S. Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) ---- Appellant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) ---- State/Non-Applicant For Applicant in Cr.A No. 395/2021 :

Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Senior Adv.

along with Shri Sabyasachi Bhaduri Advocate.

For Applicant in Cr.A. No. 424/2021 :

Shri Satya Prakash Verma, Adv.

For State :

Dr. Veena Nair, Dy. Adv. General For Objector :

Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya, J Order on Board 22/07/2021

1. Heard.

2. Since both the appeals arise out of same crime number, therefore, they are being decided by this common order.

3. These appeals under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, have been filed by the appellants against the orders dated 06/03/2021 and 09/03/2021, respectively passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, refusing to allow the bail applications filed

under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.

4. The appellants have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 159/2021 registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District Sarguja for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 201, 509 (B), 34 of the IPC and Section 3

(2) (v) of Scheduled caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Section 67, 67-A of I.T. Act and Sections 4 & 6 of the Indecent representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986.

5. Counsel for the appellants seeks permission to withdraw these appeals with liberty to file the same after four months, if the trial is not completed within the said period.

6. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty granted in favour of the appellants.

Sd/- (Gautam Chourdiya) Judge rahul