The court reaffirmed that bail once granted should not be cancelled unless there are cogent reasons, and the absence of arrest during investigation can weigh favorably in granting bail.

JUDGMENT :

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J

1. The petitioner-complainant, by way of the present petition, seeks cancellation of bail granted to the respondent no. 2-accused vide order dated 15.03.2022 [hereafter "impugned order"] passed by the learned ASJ-02, South-East, Saket Courts, Delhi [hereafter "Trial Court"] in case arising out of FIR No. 158/2019, registered at Police Station Jamia Nagar, South-East, Delhi for commission of offence punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [hereafter "SC/ST Act"] .

2. Briefly stated, the FIR came to be registered on the complaint of the petitioner pursuant to directions under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. The petitioner had been working as a Guest Teacher (TGT-Computer) at Jamia Middle School, Jamia Millia Islamia University since 26.09.2017. It was alleged that from the very first day of his joining, the accused, who was officiating as Head Master, had enquired about his caste and, upon learning that he belonged to the Scheduled Caste community (Jatav), had started humiliating and insulting him before other staff members by repeatedly addressing him with caste-based abusive words. The accused had compelled the complainant to perform menial tasks such as preparing tea, washing utensils and hanging curtains, and had threatened to terminate his services when he objected. On several occasions, he had publicly humiliated the complainant by calling him derogatory names in front of other teachers. On 26.11.2017, the complainant had been called to school on a holiday and forced to serve tea to a guest, and on the same day was allegedly asked to copy obscene material from a pen drive to a mobile phone, which he refused. The complainant had informed other staff members, who had also objected to such behaviour. On 22.02.2018, the accused had again abused and threatened him for complaining about these acts, and later, in conspiracy with another teacher, had terminated his employment on baseless grounds. On these allegations, the present FIR came to be registered.

3. As per Status Report, during the course of investigation, the caste certificate of the complainant was verified from Tehsildar, Sikandarabad, Uttar Pradesh. Several witnesses were also examined by the I.O., however, they denied the allegations levelled by the complainant against the accused, except a few related to the complainant being asked to make tea by the accused. The respondent no.2-accused was interrogated during the course of investigation, but was not arrested and was bound down as per Section 41A of the Cr.P.C.

4. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed against the accused before the concerned Court. Upon being summoned by the learned Trial Court, the respondent no.2-accused filed a bail application. The said bail application was decided vide impugned order dated 15.03.2022 and he was granted bail in the present case. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under:

“6. Accused admittedly was not arrested by police during investigation. He is a retired teacher from Jamila Milia Islamia University. There are no criminal antecedents of accused. The allegations of accused threatening family members of complainant are vague. Ld. Counsel for complainant argued that investigation must be carried out by police, with regard to the fact that accused may threaten family members of complainant. The said submissions, as