Baljinder Singh vs State of Punjab

Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.139 dated 19.07.2016 under Sections 363/366A/376/120B

IPC, Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the ''SC/ST Act'') and Sections 3/4

of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station City Nakodar, District Jalandhar.

It is submitted that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR. He is sought to be inculpated on the statement of none other, but co-accused

Manpreet Singh. Three persons specifically named in the FIR, namely, Rajat, Jaswinder Kaur and Rohit were declared to be innocent and another

set of persons have been sought to be inculpated. It is specifically submitted that there is no evidence whatsoever on record except the said

statement of the coaccused against the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner has joined investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioner further

submits that no offence is made out against the petitioner, specifically under Section 3 of the SC/ST Act. Therefore, the bar to the grant of

anticipatory bail is not attracted in the present facts and circumstances of the case. The petitioner, it is submitted, undertakes to face the

proceedings and not misuse the concession of anticipatory bail, if confirmed. Therefore, it is prayed that this petition be allowed.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Iqbal Singh, submits that the petitioner has joined investigation pursuant to order dated

03.11.2017. She is unable to point out anything on record inculpating the present petitioner except the statement of the co-accused Manpreet

Singh against the petitioner. The petitioner, it is verified, is not involved in any other criminal case.

In respect to the bar of grant of anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act, it has been held by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Vilas Pandurang

Pawar and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and others, 2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 761 a duty is cast on the Court to verify the averments and find

out whether an offence under the SC/ST Act is made out. Prima facie, there do not appear to be any allegations against the petitioner to invite the

rigours of the provisions of the SC/ST Act in the present case, though on considering the entire evidence, the learned trial Court may ultimately find

the accused to be guilty.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing

true facts before the Court, if released on bail.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above but without commenting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this

petition is allowed. Consequently, order dated 03.11.2017 is made absolute.

It is clarified that none of the observations made hereinabove shall be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case. The same are solely

confined for the purpose of decision of the present petition.