Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Lahu Vitthalrao Bhosale, filed an appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (the Act) against the order of the Special Judge rejecting his application for anticipatory bail. The appellant was accused in Crime No. 14/2019 registered at Chakur Police Station for offences under Sections 307, 341, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Act. The first informant, Udhav Shinde, alleged that on 3.1.2019 at about 6.10 p.m., while he was returning from his agricultural land in his car, the appellant's car came from behind and tried to dash his car. The appellant overtook and stopped his car, then abused the informant with caste-related words and threatened to kill him. The appellant contended that the incident was a road rage and not motivated by caste, and that the informant had a prior dispute with the appellant's uncle. The court examined the FIR and found that the incident arose from a traffic dispute, not from caste animus. The abusive language used was not specifically directed at the informant's caste. The court held that the bar under Section 18 of the Act does not apply if no prima facie case under the Act is made out. Considering the lack of criminal antecedents and the appellant's permanent residence, the court granted anticipatory bail on certain conditions.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 CrPC read with Section 14-A of SC/ST Act - Bar under Section 18 of SC/ST Act - The court considered whether the allegations prima facie constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act, as the bar under Section 18 applies only if a prima facie case exists. Held that the bar does not apply if the allegations do not disclose an offence under the Act (Paras 5-7). B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(r)(s) - Intent to Humiliate on Caste Basis - The incident arose from a road rage and not due to caste of the informant. The abusive language used was not in the context of caste. Held that without intent to humiliate on caste grounds, the offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s) is not made out (Paras 8-10). C) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Discretion to Grant Bail - The court exercised discretion to grant anticipatory bail considering the nature of allegations, lack of criminal antecedents, and that the appellant is a permanent resident. Held that custodial interrogation is not required (Paras 11-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of CrPC read with Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act, considering the bar under Section 18 of the Act and the nature of allegations.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The order of the Special Judge rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside. The appellant is directed to be released on bail in Crime No. 14/2019 on executing PR bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to conditions including attendance at police station as required, not tampering with evidence, and not committing similar offences.
Law Points
- Anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 14-A SC/ST Act
- Prima facie case
- Intent to humiliate on caste basis
- Road rage incident
- Abusive language not caste-based
