CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Chetan And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 14 November 2025 · Citation: (2025) 11 MP CK 1977

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gajendra Singh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Scheduled Castes And The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 14A(2) · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 3(5), 115(1), 118(1), 296, 331(6), 351(2) · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25 · Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 480(3)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 10786, 10904 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 375 words

Gajendra Singh, J

1.

These criminal appeals under section 14A (2) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is preferred being aggrieved by the order dated 29.10.2025 in SCATR No.299/2025 by Special Judge, SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Dewas arising out of crime No.599/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District- Dewas (M.P.).

All the appellants taken into custody on 27-29.11.2025 for the offence punishable under Section 296, 115(2), 118(1), 331(6), 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and under section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) and 3(2)(v) of the SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989.

2.

The impugned order discloses that appellants were released on bail on 14.10.2024 and thereafter, final report was prepared disclosing offence under the provision of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 on 27.10.2025. Appellants surrendered before the court and they were taken into custody. It is alleged that all the appellants never misused the liberty of bail granted to them and surrendered before the trial court as they came to know about the provisions of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 made applicable.

3.

Counsel for the State has opposed the criminal appeal.

4.

Counsel for the objector also opposed the criminal appeal.

5.

Perused the record.

6.

Final report discloses that a total four persons have been made accused in this case, Priya Chouhan, Chetan Raikwar, Bittu@ Durgesh and Ajay Rathore. Caste of Chetan is mentioned as Chamar in the final report and co-accused Priya is mentioned in arrest memo that she belongs to scheduled caste community.

7.

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, these criminal appeal are allowed and the appellants CHETAN and DURGESH SHARMA @ BITTU are directed to be released on bail upon the conditions to the satisfaction of the trial court and upon their furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) each with separate sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for their appearance before that Court, as and when directed, during the pendency of trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under section 480 (3) of the BNSS, 2023.

C.C. as per rules.