Saddam Husain vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Heard.

Since both these criminal appeals are arising out of the same crime number, therefore, they are being heard and decided together by this common

order.

The present appeals are arising out of order dated 08.10.2021 and 20.10.2021, respectively, passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Sarguja,

Ambikapur, District Surguja in Crime No.122/2021.

The appellants have preferred these appeals for grant of bail as they are arrested in connection with Crime No.122/2021 registered in Police Station

Lundra, District Surguja (C.G.) for offence punishable under sections 365, 366, 376 (D), 394, 294, 506 (B) & 120 (B) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and

under Section 3(2-5) of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989.

As per the prosecution case, on 22.08.2021 while the prosecutrix was going to her village at that time all the three accused came on a motorcycle

and stopped the prosecutrix, thereafter, took her to a grocery shop and snatched away the mobile and headphone and subsequently one accused

namely Anwarul Haque committed rape in which the other accused also supported by guard. Thereafter, the appellants were arrested and were

identified.

Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the appellants have been falsely implicated and no objection has been made for grant of bail to

the appellants, therefore, the appellants may be enlarged on bail.

Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

Perused the statement of the victim and the case-diary. The case-diary shows that the appellants were identified by the victim after arrest. Though

the allegation of rape is on the appellant namely Anwarul Haque, however, joint charges of loot of mobile and assisting in committing the rape is

against the other accused persons, considering the same and for the fact that there are chances of tampering of evidence because as per FIR the

appellants were not known to prosecutrix earlier to the offence but were identified after arrest, which prima facie corroborates the incident, subject to

trial, therefore, I am not inclined to allow these appeals.

Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed.