Case Note & Summary
The appeal was filed by six accused persons against the order of the Sessions Court rejecting their application for pre-arrest bail in Crime No. 91 of 2019 registered at Shiradhon Police Station for offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The complainant, Jyotiram Mahadeo Kharatmal, alleged that on 29-06-2019, the accused persons, who are upper caste, assaulted him and his family members with sticks and iron pipes, and abused them with caste names such as 'Mahar' and 'Mang', while they were working on their land. The accused claimed that the incident was a result of a land dispute and that the caste abuse was incidental. The court examined the FIR and found that the dispute was primarily over land and that the allegations did not prima facie disclose an intent to humiliate the complainant on the ground of caste. The court held that the bar under Section 18 of the Act is not attracted when the accusations do not make out a prima facie case under the Act. Accordingly, the court allowed the appeal and granted pre-arrest bail to the appellants on certain conditions.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Pre-arrest Bail - Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Anticipatory Bail - The court considered whether the bar under Section 18 of the Act applies when the allegations do not prima facie disclose an intent to humiliate on the ground of caste - Held that the bar is not attracted if the accusations do not make out a prima facie case under the Act, and the court can grant anticipatory bail in such cases (Paras 7-10). B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(2)(va) - Intent to Humiliate - Land Dispute - The incident arose from a land dispute where the complainant was allegedly assaulted and abused with caste names - The court found that the allegations did not prima facie show that the accused intended to humiliate the complainant on the ground of caste, as the dispute was over land and the caste abuse appeared incidental - Held that the bar under Section 18 is not applicable and pre-arrest bail can be granted (Paras 8-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellants-accused are entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, when the allegations do not prima facie disclose an intent to humiliate the complainant on the ground of caste.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order rejecting pre-arrest bail is set aside. The appellants are directed to be released on bail in Crime No. 91 of 2019 on executing a PR bond of Rs. 15,000/- each with one solvent surety. They are to attend the police station as and when required and not tamper with evidence or pressurize the complainant.
Law Points
- Pre-arrest bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- 1989
- Section 14-A(2)
- Prima facie case
- Intent to humiliate on caste basis
- Land dispute
