Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Jyoti Deorao Mhaske, a woman belonging to the Mang caste (a Scheduled Caste), filed a complaint alleging that on 23 February 2011, while she was walking on a public street in front of New Om Medical and General Stores in CIDCO, Aurangabad, the respondents (Manikchand Bansilal Chudiwal, Dhiraj Manikchand Chudiwal, Ujawala Manikchand Chudiwal, and Smita Manikchand Chudiwal), who belong to the Jain Marwadi caste (non-SC/ST), humiliated her by using caste-based abusive language and assaulted her. Initially, the police did not register the complaint, prompting the petitioner to file Criminal Writ Petition No. 635/2011. Pursuant to notice in that petition, the police registered Crime No. I-14/2011 on 22 August 2011 under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) and Sections 323, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The investigation included a scene of offence panchanama and witness statements. Immediately after registration, the accused (respondents 5 to 8) filed Criminal Bail Application No. 1339/2011 before the Special Judge for SC/ST Act cases in Aurangabad, seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The Special Judge granted anticipatory bail on 15 September 2011. The petitioner challenged this order in the present writ petition. The legal issue was whether the Special Judge could grant anticipatory bail in view of the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act, which provides that Section 438 CrPC shall not apply to offences under the Act. The petitioner argued that the bar is absolute and the Special Judge had no jurisdiction. The respondents contended that the complaint was false and that the bar does not apply if no prima facie case exists. The court analyzed the allegations and found that the complaint disclosed a prima facie case under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act, as the incident allegedly occurred on a public street, which is a place within public view. The court held that the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act is clear and unambiguous, and once a prima facie case is made out, anticipatory bail cannot be granted. The court set aside the order of the Special Judge and dismissed the anticipatory bail application.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Bar under Section 18 of SC/ST Act - Section 438 CrPC, Section 18 SC/ST Act - The court held that where a prima facie case under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act exists, the bar under Section 18 of the Act applies and anticipatory bail cannot be granted. The Special Judge's order granting bail was set aside as it overlooked the statutory bar. (Paras 1-10) B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Offence under Section 3(1)(x) - Ingredients - Public View - Section 3(1)(x) - The offence requires intentional insult or intimidation with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view. The court found that the allegations of caste abuse on a public street satisfied the ingredient of 'public view'. (Paras 2-5) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Maintainability - Section 438 CrPC - The court reiterated that the power to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is not available where a special enactment like the SC/ST Act contains a specific bar. The Special Judge's order was held to be without jurisdiction. (Paras 6-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Special Judge erred in granting anticipatory bail to the accused under Section 438 CrPC despite the bar under Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, when a prima facie case under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act was made out.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, set aside the order dated 15/09/2011 granting anticipatory bail to respondent Nos. 5 to 8, and dismissed Criminal Bail Application No. 1339/2011.
Law Points
- Anticipatory bail is not maintainable under Section 438 CrPC when an offence under the SC/ST Act is alleged
- due to the bar under Section 18 of the Act
- the bar applies even if the accused claims false implication
- the court must consider the prima facie existence of the offence before granting bail.
