Anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act can be granted if essential ingredients of the alleged offence are not met, as established in the judgment.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Appeal (SJ) has been filed under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act with the prayer to set aside the order dated 25.02.2025 passed in A.B.P. No.114 of 2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Garhwa in connection with Ramkanda P.S. Case No.05 of 2023.

3. The allegation against the appellant is that the appellant has abused the informant by using filthy language and also abused him by taking his caste name and on being protested by the informant, the appellant caught hold of the neck of the informant and attempted to press the same and also threatened to get the informant caught by A.C.B. and to make complaint against the informant to the Lokpal. On the basis of the written-report submitted by the informant, police registered Ramkanda P.S. Case No.05 of 2023 and took up the investigation of the case. After completion of the investigation, police submitted charge-sheet against the appellant for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323 , 341, 353, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellant filed A.B.P. No.114 of 2025 but the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Garhwa considered that since the F.I.R. has been registered for the offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, hence, in view of the bar under Section 18 of the said Act, the anticipatory bail application filed by the appellant is not maintainable and dismissed the same.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Garhwa failed to consider that since there is no allegation anywhere as to the effect that the petitioner abused any member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe by his caste name in any place within public view, the offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is not made out. It is further submitted that there is absolutely no material in the record as to which caste the informant belongs to and there is no averment made anywhere by the informant that he is either a member of the Scheduled Caste or a member of the Scheduled Tribe. So as no penal offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out against the appellant even if the entire allegations made against him are considered to be true, hence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Garhwa has committed a grave illegality by rejecting the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer, as prayed for in the instant Criminal Appeal, be allowed.

5. Learned Addl. P. P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 on the other hand vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant made in the instant Criminal Appeal. The learned counsel for the respondent no.2 relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case ofKiran vs. Rajkumar Jivraj Jain & Another reported in2025 INSC 1067 wherein in the light of the parameters in relation to the applicability of Section 18 of the of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India summarized t