Bombay High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Accused in SC/ST Atrocity Case — Prima Facie Case Not Made Out. FIR under Sections 3(1)(3) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act fails to disclose essential ingredients, hence bar under Section 18 not attracted.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The judgment pertains to two criminal appeals filed by the original accused in Crime No.03 of 2020 registered with Mahur Police Station, District Nanded, for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(3), 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The FIR was lodged by respondent No.2, Keshav Ganpat Bhagat. The appellants filed these appeals under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act seeking anticipatory bail. The court heard both sides and admitted the appeals as arguable points were raised. By consent, the appeals were taken up for final disposal. The court examined the FIR and found that the allegations did not prima facie disclose the ingredients of the offences under the SC/ST Act, particularly the requirement of caste-based insult or intimidation in public view. Consequently, the court held that the bar under Section 18 of the Act was not attracted and granted anticipatory bail to the appellants. The court directed that in the event of arrest, the appellants be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.15,000 each with one surety.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Anticipatory Bail - Section 14-A SC/ST Act - Prima Facie Case - The court considered whether the FIR disclosed ingredients of offences under the SC/ST Act. Held that where the FIR does not prima facie make out the alleged offences, the bar under Section 18 of the Act is not attracted and anticipatory bail can be granted. (Paras 4-5)

B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(3) and 3(1)(s) - Ingredients - The court examined the allegations and found that the FIR lacked specific averments regarding caste-based insult or intimidation in public view. Held that mere mention of caste without context does not attract the provisions. (Paras 4-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, when the FIR does not prima facie disclose the commission of offences under the Act.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeals are allowed. The order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside. The appellants are directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.03 of 2020 on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.15,000 each with one surety.

Law Points

  • Anticipatory bail
  • SC/ST Act
  • Section 14-A
  • prima facie case
  • ingredients of offence
  • Section 3(1)(3)
  • Section 3(1)(s)
  • Section 143
  • 147
  • 148
  • 149
  • 506 IPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (BOM) (05) 2

Criminal Appeal No.114 of 2020 with Criminal Appeal No.120 of 2020

2020-05-08

Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.

Mr. S. S. Deshmukh (for Appellants), Mr. B. V. Virdhe (APP for Respondent No.1-State), Mr. S. A. Nagarsoge (for Respondent No.2)

Pratik S/O Rameshwar Kopulwar, Mangesh @ Lakhan s/o Uttam Rikkamwar, Santosh s/o Rameshwar Rikkamwar, Arjun s/o Mohan Rathod, Lakhan s/o Uttam Jadhav, Rameshwar s/o Kondbaji Musale, Mohmmad Mujib s/o Mohmmad Suleman Faruqui

The State of Maharashtra, Keshav Ganpat Bhagat

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeals under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act against rejection of anticipatory bail.

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought anticipatory bail in Crime No.03 of 2020.

Filing Reason

Appellants were accused in FIR for offences under IPC and SC/ST Act; they apprehended arrest and sought pre-arrest bail.

Issues

Whether the FIR prima facie discloses the commission of offences under the SC/ST Act? Whether the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act applies to the present case?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that the FIR does not make out any offence under the SC/ST Act as there is no specific allegation of caste-based insult or intimidation in public view. Respondent-State opposed bail, contending that the allegations attract the provisions of the SC/ST Act and the bar under Section 18 applies.

Ratio Decidendi

Where the FIR does not prima facie disclose the ingredients of the offences under the SC/ST Act, the bar under Section 18 of the Act is not attracted, and the court can grant anticipatory bail under Section 14-A.

Judgment Excerpts

Since arguable points are made, the appeals are admitted. By consent the appeals are taken up for final disposal.

Procedural History

FIR was lodged on 08-01-2020. Appellants filed applications for anticipatory bail which were rejected. They then filed these appeals under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act. The appeals were admitted and taken up for final disposal by consent.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 143, 147, 148, 149, 506
  • Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989: 3(1)(3), 3(1)(s), 14-A, 18
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Life Sentence for Husband in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence. Conviction under Section 302 IPC for killing wife sustained as chain of circumstances including motive, last seen together, and recovery of weapon wa...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Arbitration Matter — Service Tax Reimbursement Denied for Non-Submission of Cenvatable Documents. Contractual Condition Requiring Submission of Cenvatable Documents for Service Tax Reimbursement Upheld as Valid...