(1.) The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the order dtd. 20/1/2022 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Special Court under the S.C. and S.T. (PoA) Act, Cuttack rejecting the appellant's prayer for bail in C.T. Case No.176 of 2019 arising out of Mahanga P.S. Case No.264 of 2019 registered under Ss. 292/ 506/ 509/ 468/ 469 of the I.P.C. read with Ss. 66-C/66-E/ 67/ 67-A of the I.T. Act and Sec. 3(2)(va) of the S.C. and S.T. (PoA) Act.
(2.) Prosecution case in brief is that: On 9/12/2019 at about 4.00 P.M. the I.I.C., Mahanga Police Station, Mahanga received the letter dtd. 19/11/2019 from the Superintendent of Police, CID, Crime Branch, Odisha, Cuttack through Dak enclosing the complaint of one Bharati Mallik, daughter of Amulya Mallik of village Raghunathanagar, P.S.- Mahanga, District- Cuttack wherein she alleged that before one year one Satyananda Sahoo, son of Birabara Sahoo of village Bhanraj, P.S.- Mahanga, District- Cuttack had opened four numbers of Facebook accounts in her name. In the said Facebook accounts he had uploaded her obscene photographs and also that of her sisters. He called her from various telephone numbers and used to send messages. He threatened her that if she did not receive his phone call, he would make viral her photographs and kill her. He continuously abused her in obscene languages by naming her caste like 'PANA'. He also threatened her to set fire in her house.
(3.) Mr. A.K. Moharana, learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that the appellant is no way connected to the present case. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the appellant and the informant were in love for quite a substantial period. As the appellant did not agree to marry the informant, there was a hot argument between the appellant and the family members of the informant. Hence, the informant has filed the said false complaint only to put the appellant behind the bar. The family members also snatched away the mobile phones of the appellant and knowingly and cunningly made viral of the nude photographs of the informant and her sister through the Facebook accounts. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant being called by the informant had been to her house on 15/10/2019. A marriage proposal with the informant was given by the family members of the informant to him. But, as the elder brother of the appellant had not got married, the appellant denied said the proposal and asked the family members of the informant to wait for some time i.e. till the marriage of his elder brother. But, the informant and her family members with an ulterior motive illegally kept the appellant under lock and key and lodged the false report.