Vidyanand Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR • Vidyanand Sahu S/o Nanduram Sahu Aged About 59 Years Occupation Incharge Principal, At Govt. High School, Village Khajuri, R/o Village Kodpuri, P. S. Hirri, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Hirri, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant Mr. KPS Gandhi, Advocate For Respondent/State Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Additional Advocate General For Complainants Mr. Aman Kesharwani, Advocate Proceedings through Video Conferencing SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 21/8/2020

1. Heard.

2. This is an application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.25/2020 registered at Police Station Hirri, Civil and Revenue District Bilaspur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 354(a) of the IPC and Sections 8, 12 of the

Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3. The applicant is the Principal of Government High School, Khajuri, P.S. Hirri, District Bilaspur (CG). A complaint was lodged by the villagers alleging that the applicant used to commit aggravated sexual offence against the minor girl students. Subsequently, the parents/complainants moved an application before the Dy. S.P., AJK, Bilaspur that they have lodged the complaint under some confusion and they do not want any action. The afÏdavits of the parents were also filed, however, when this Court directed for verification of the afÏdavits, it was reported that the parents of the complainant have not given any such afÏdavits.

4. Now countering the report, Mr. KPS Gandhi, learned counsel for the applicant, has filed fresh afÏdavits of the complainants dated 15.8.2020 again stating that because of the dispute regarding handing over the charge of Principal of the School, the complaint was lodged, however, no such incident, as alleged against the applicant, has taken place.

5. Mr. Aman Kesharwani, learned counsel appearing for the complainants/parents, would also submit that the complainants did not want any action against the applicant.

6. Considering the different stands taken by the parents at different stages of the investigation and before this Court, I am inclined to extend the benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to the applicant.

7. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting OfÏcer with the following conditions :- (i) he shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police OfÏcer as and when required;

(ii) 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 for disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police OfÏcer.

(iii) he shall not influence the witnesses during pendency of the trial.

8. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Judge Shyna