Keshav Agrawal vs State Of Chhattisgarh

The Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.36 of 2017 registered at Police Station Azak, District Korba for offences

alleged under Sections 294, 323, 325, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(Va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act (henceforth “the Prevention Actâ€​).

Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 4.9.2017 at 16:45 hours, Complainant Yash Chaturvedi, a member of Scheduled Caste intimated Police

Station City Kotwali, Korba that at 16:40 hours he was beaten by the Applicant for a dispute relating to purchase of mobile handset through online

process. This intimation was recorded in Rojnamcha Sanha No.37 on 4.9.2017. Later on, after inquiry, it was found that the Applicant had abused the

Complainant in the name of his mother and sister. Therefore, offence under Sections 294, 323, 325 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(Va) of

the Prevention Act was registered against the Applicant.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that all the offences alleged against the Applicant under the Indian Penal Code are bailable

and only the offence alleged against him under the Prevention Act is not bailable. He further submits that initially the complaint was recorded in

Rojnamcha Sanha No.37 on 4.9.2017 in which no allegation regarding abuse to the Complainant by the Applicant in the name of caste of the

Complainant was recorded, but, about two months thereafter, as an after-thought, the allegation of abuse in the name of caste has been levelled

against the Applicant and thus he has falsely been implicated. It is further submitted that after going through the contents of the First Information

Report also, it is established that none of the ingredients of the offence alleged against the Applicant under the Prevention Act is made out. Therefore,

the Applicant may be admitted to anticipatory bail.

Learned Counsel appearing for the State/Respondent opposes the submission put-forth by Learned Counsel for the Applicant. He draws attention

of this Court to the provision contained in Section 18 of the Prevention Act stating that the present application under Section 438 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure would not be maintainable in view of the said provision.

I have heard Learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available with due care.

The law in relation to entertaining an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in such offences is well settled. The

provision of Section 18 of the Prevention Act puts a complete bar against entertainment of an application for anticipatory bail where prima facie the

contents of the First Information Report discloses the ingredients of commission of offence under the Prevention Act.

I have gone through the case diary. The entry in Rojnamcha Sanha No.37 made on 4.9.2017 regarding the complaint lodged by Yash Chaturvedi

does not show that the Applicant used any word which would constitute the alleged offence against him under the Prevention Act. The First

Information Report dated 23.11.2017 also does not show that the Applicant used any word which would constitute mens rea to humiliate to a member

of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view. The FIR, thus, in my view, does not prima facie constitute any offence against

the Applicant under the Prevention Act. It is settled law that where the Court is prima facie satisfied while considering an application under Section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that at that stage a case of Section 3(2)(Va) of the Prevention Act would not be attracted, the Applicant may

be released on bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, in my considered opinion, the Applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest of the Applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on

furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Presiding

Officer of the concerned Trial Court. He shall also abide by all the following terms and conditions:

(i) 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,

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

(iii) He shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.