Chattisgarh High Court
Dilip Kumar Lambadi vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 February, 2022
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 1082 of 2021
Dilip Kumar Lambadi S/o Narayan Lambadi Aged About 32 Years R/o Rani
Durgawati Ward Bhopalpattanam, Present Address Bijapur, Police Station
Bijapur District Bijapur Chhattisgarh.
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Bhopalpattanam, District
Bijapur Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
For Appellant : Shri T.K.Jha, Advocate. For Respondent /State : Shri Raghvendra Verma, Govt. Advocate
(Proceedings through Video Conferencing.) Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 10.02.2022
1. The present appeal is arising out of order dated 16.09.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC ST Act), South Bastar Dantewada, District Dantewada in Bail Petition No.77 of 2021.
2. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act, 1989') for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.23/2021, registered at Police Station Bhopalpattanam, District Bijapur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 376, 323, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
3. As per the prosecution case, the appellant allured the victim and on the pretext of marriage committed sexual intercourse. Subsequently 2 when he refused, the prosecutrix went to the society wherein the appellant and his family members were called but they did not appear. Subsequently, on pressure being committed, the appellant took the prosecutrix and kept her in some rented room and continued the sexual relation on the pretext of marriage. Further when he again refused to marry, threat was extended and assault was made and forcefully certain documents were got signed, the report has been made.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the victim is 24 years of age and they were in love affair for 4 to 5 years, he is friend of the brother of the victim and they were live in relation for two years. He would submit that the victim is Christian and she pressed the applicant to follow the Christianity, therefore, this route caused the dispute. He would further submit that the applicant is Class-III employee in the Labour Department, therefore, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
6. The victim appeared before this Court through DLSA Bijapur and she objected to grant bail to the applicant.
7. Considering the nature of allegation made and the threat which was extended and certain documents as per the prosecutrix got signed, it is not a case where the benefit of Section 438 can be granted to the applicant. Accordingly, the appeal is rejected.
Sd/-
(Goutam Bhaduri)
Aks Judge