Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Papu Ashok Supekar, Umesh Nivrutti Kolhe, Ashok Sakharam Supekar, and Mrs. Lata Ashok Supekar, filed an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, challenging the order dated 13/03/2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Niphad, which dismissed their application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The Sessions Judge had dismissed the application on the ground that it was barred by Sections 18 and 18-A of the Prevention of Atrocities Act. The appellants, represented by Mr. Amey R. Deshpande, argued that there was no prima facie material to attract the provisions of the Prevention of Atrocities Act, and therefore the bar under Sections 18 and 18A was not attracted. They also highlighted that they had filed a cross complaint against the first informant and his family members, and that the offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were not grave enough to justify custodial interrogation. The State, represented by APP Mrs. S.V. Sonawane, contended that the first information report prima facie indicated that the first informant was a tribal and that the appellants had intimidated, insulted, and assaulted him and his family members within public view. The court, presided over by Smt. Anuja Prabhudessai, J., considered the submissions and noted that the first information report did not prima facie disclose that the appellants had insulted or intimidated the first informant within public view with the intent to humiliate him on the ground of caste. The court also observed that the appellants had filed a cross complaint, indicating a dispute between the parties. The court held that the bar under Sections 18 and 18A of the Prevention of Atrocities Act was not attracted as there was no prima facie case under the Act. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and granted anticipatory bail to the appellants on certain conditions.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Maintainability - The court considered whether the bar under Sections 18 and 18A of the SC/ST Act applies when there is no prima facie material to attract the provisions of the Act. Held that if no prima facie case is made out, the bar does not apply and anticipatory bail is maintainable. (Paras 2-5) B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Bar under Sections 18 and 18A - Applicability - The court examined the scope of the bar against anticipatory bail under the Act. Held that the bar is not attracted if the allegations do not prima facie constitute an offence under the Act. (Paras 2-5) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Grant of Bail - The court assessed the gravity of IPC offences and the existence of a cross complaint. Held that custodial interrogation was not justified and granted anticipatory bail. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the bar under Sections 18 and 18A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 applies when there is no prima facie material to attract the provisions of the Act, and whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is maintainable.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 13/03/2019 is set aside. The appellants are granted anticipatory bail on certain conditions.
Law Points
- Anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 14A(2) SC/ST Act
- Bar under Sections 18 and 18A
- Prima facie case
- Cross complaint
