AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anand Byrareddy, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
The petitioners are accused of an offence punishable u/s 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the ''SC & ST Act'' for brevity)
The learned counsel would canvass an attractive argument that the primary requirement to attract the provisions of the SC & ST Act, would be to establish that the accused were aware of the complainant belonging to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and with that knowledge, having insulted or humiliated the said complainant and, in the absence of any such prima facie material to hold that the offence has been committed under the SC & ST Act, would be putting "the cart before the horse" and hence, the bar u/s 18 of the SC & ST Act would not be attracted in considering the present petition for anticipatory bail.
However, from a reading of Section 18, the bar is complete, in that, Section 438 is completely excluded if there is a case under the provisions of the SC & ST Act. Notwithstanding the defence that may be available to the accused, it is open for the accused to set up all the defences that are available to him at the trial, the bar would not apply insofar as the accused seeking bail in the normal course. Therefore, when that remedy is available to the petitioner, to consider the anticipatory bail petition even though admittedly there is a case under the provisions of the Act, would be contrary to the law. Hence, without prejudice to the merits of the petitioner''s case, which may be urged before the court below, the petition stands disposed of.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor to file his memo of appearance within two weeks.