Mirja Mohsin Beg vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

This first criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act 1989, by the appellant Mirza Mohsin Beg, who has been arrested by Police on 18.3.2020 in Crime No.94/2020 Police Station-Kotwali Shajapur, in connection with offence under Section 341, 204, 506 of IPC and Under Section 3(1) (R) and 3 (1) (s), 3(2) (VA) of SC/ST Act.

Much emphasis is given by the learned counsel for the appellant on the merits of the case. Plea of alibi is taken as another ground for pressing anticipatory bail in this case. Several documents showing that various complaints have been made by the appellant or his other family members and to show that on the date of incident the appellant was in Ajmer have been referred by learned counsel for the appellant. Judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Dr. Subash Kashinath Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC (Cri) 124 is referred in support of the contention which says that bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST of Act 1989 does not apply when no case under the SC/ST Act is made out from the allegations.

The State has relied upon the FIR as well as the allegations made by the complainant in his statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C before the JMFC. It is further argued that the documents of defence cannot be relied upon at this stage as they have neither filed before the police nor the police had any opportunity to investigate them.

Objector has raised single contention that there is a bar in granting anticipatory bail in the cases registered under the SC/ST Act 1989.

In the FIR as well as in his statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C the complainant has made allegations that due to some money dispute the appellant abused him in the name of his caste and insulted him as he belongs to the scheduled caste. From the allegations made in the FIR as well as in the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C of the Complainant prima facie case under the relevant provisions of the ST/SC Act is made out. Therefore, bar created under Section 18 of the Act of 1989 operates in this case.

Hence, no case for granting anticipatory bail is made out, therefore, the appeal is dismissed.