The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and the interpretations of the same, as well as the specific conditions under which bail could be granted.

ORDER

1. Instant appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (herein after referred to as ’the Act of 1989’) has been preferred on behalf of accused-appellants, namely (i) Sampatlal, (ii) Heeralal and (iii) Mukesh, who are apprehending their arrest in F.I.R. bearing No.246/2021 registered at Police Station Hindaun District Karauli for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 384, 307, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 (1) (c) (r) (s) and 3 (2) (va) of the Act of 1989 against the impugned order dated 27.01.2022 passed by the Court of Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Karauli, whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the accused-appellants was rejected.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-appellants submits that the parties have already entered into compromise and resolved their dispute amicably, hence, the appeal of the accused-appellants may be granted and they be released on bail.

3. During the course of arguments, learned counsel appearing for the accused-appellants, has placed reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand (AIR 2020 Supreme Court 5584) and Prathi Raj Chauhan Vs. Union of India (AIR 2020 Supreme Court 1036).

4. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the appeal, whereas, the learned counsel appearing for the complainant, has no objection, if the anticipatory bail is granted.

5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material made available on record.

Head-notes of the judgment cited by learned counsel for the appellants in the case of Hitesh Verma (supra) read as under:-

"Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (33 of 1989), S.3(1)(r), S.3(1)(x)- Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974), S.482- Offence of atrocities - Quashing of charge-sheet - As per FIR, allegations of abusing informant were within four walls of her building and not within public view - Offence under S.3(1)(r) is not made out merely because informant belonging to a Scheduled Caste -Charge-sheet liable to be quashed.’ (Emphasis supplied)

6. Head-notes of the judgment cited by learned counsel for the appellants in the case of Prathvi Raj Chauhan (supra) read as under:-

"Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974), S.438 - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (33 of 1989), S.18A - (as inserted by Amendment Act 27 of 2018)

Constitution of India, Art.21 - Anticipatory bail - Offence of atrocity under Act of 1989 - Challenge to denial - Bar created by Ss. 18 and 18A against grant of anticipatory bail in case of atrocity against SC and ST shall not apply unless prima-facie case is made out - However in case of misuse of provisions Court can quash the cases to prevent misuse on settled parameters.’ (Emphasis supplied)

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned advocates appearing for the accused-appellants & complainant and the facts and circumstances of the case; but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of opinion that the appellants deserve to be enlarged on bail.

8. Consequently, instant appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 27.01.2022 passed by the Court of Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Karauli is set aside. It is ordered that in the event of arrest of the accused-appellants, namely (i) Sampatlal, (ii) Heeralal and (iii) Mukesh in F.I.R. No.246/2021 registered at Police Station Hindaun District Karauli by the Investigating Officer, the accused-appellants shall be enlarged on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/-each to the satisfaction of concerned S.H.O./I.O. on the following c