Dinesh Verma VsState Of Chhattisgarh

This appeal is filed by the accused/appellant under Section 14(A) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 read with Section 378 (4) of the Cr.PC. for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.05/2021 registered at Police Station Ajak, District Bilaspur for the offence punishable under Sections 294 & 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) द & 3 (1) ध of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “Act 1989”).

Prosecution story in nutshell is that written report was filed by the complainant Vinay Sonwani to the effect that on 18.10.2021 at about 6 PM when the complainant was leveling the land of one Ajay Sidara and Vinay Kashyap using his JCB Machine, the applicant came there and asked the name of complainant and after knowing his name, he started abusing him in the name Satnami caste and also chased the complainant to assault.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He submits that there is civil dispute regarding the land for which earlier applicant has filed WPC No.1564/2008 against the Municipal Corporation and in which order has been passed on 14.01.2011. Thereafter, the Contempt Petition No.70/2020 was also preferred in which the order has been passed on 12.02.2020 in favour of the petitioner Dinesh Verma. He further submits that a civil suit also has also been filed by the family member of the applicant before the Second Additional District Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No.64A/21. Therefore, pertaining all the said long dispute the applicant has also rivalry with Ajay Sidara and Vinay Kashyap and just to take revenge from the appellant, false and concocted story has been developed to implicate the appellant in the case relating to Act of 1989. He also submits that the trial Court has passed the order in mechanical manner and rejected the bail application. Therefore, considering all the aspects when there is no prima facie case is made out, there is no absolute bar under Section 18 in cases under the Atrocities Act. He placed reliance upon the judgment of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2018) 6 SCC 454 and submits that in the judgment it has declared that there is no bar on grant of anticipatory bail under the Act of 1989. In these circumstances, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. He submits that he would abide all terms and conditions imposed on him while granting bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel and counsel for the objector strongly opposes the prayer for bail and submit that in the bare perusal of FIR, prima facie case relating to the Act of 1989 is made out. Therefore, Section 18 and 18A of the said Act completely bars the anticipatory bail. Therefore, application is liable to be rejected.

Having considered submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation particularly considering that prima facie it appears that Police Station Ajak has registered this case only because the complainant belongs to a particular community whereas in the present case serious property dispute is involved. Therefore, this Court is of the view that bar under Section 18 of the Act of 1989 does not attract and, therefore in these circumstances, the accused/applicant can be granted anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(a) he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required,

(b) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court or to any police officer,

(c) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial,

(d) after filing of the charge-sheet, he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial,

(e) they shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court,

(f) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future.