The court clarified that anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act is maintainable only if a prima facie case is not established or allegations are found to be false, motivated, or malafide.

JUDGMENT :

SUMEET GOEL, J.

1. Present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘SC/ST Act’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant in case bearing FIR No.67 dated 23.09.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Section 3 of the of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 at Police Station Sadar Budhlada, District Mansa.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question pertains to an incident whereby the complainant namely Gurmail Kaur, wife of Bhola Singh, daughter-in-law of Khiddu Singh, resident of Ward No.3, Village Datewas, District Mansa aged about 65 years alleged that she is presently serving as a Panchayat Member in village Datewas and belongs to the Scheduled Caste community. She further alleged that accused – appellant namely Kiranjeet Kaur, widow of late Nachhatar Singh belongs to the Jatt Sikh caste. On the road from the village of complainant to Ranghrial, about 05 killa (fields) away, there is a spot beside the road that is used for dumping garbage. Recently, some people also started making cow dung cakes there. On 20.09.2025, at about 06:00 AM, the complainant locked the garbage dumping site and took the key home with her. About 20 minutes later, appellant Kiranjeet Kaur, came in front of the house of the complainant and started shouting loudly. At that time, several villagers were at the nearby Gurdwara Sahib for prayers and gathered around after hearing the noise. When the complainant asked the appellant the reason for her shouting, the latter allegedly insulted the complainant in public view by uttering “Who made you a Panchayat Member, you Kutti-chudi-dhedni?” The accused - appellant continued to abuse the complainant by uttering caste based slurs. The people present at the spot intervened and sent the accused-appellant back to her home. It has been further alleged that, thereafter, the accused- appellant continued to make caste-related remarks against the complainant in public. On these set of allegations, instant FIR was registered.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has iterated that the FIR is false, motivated and has been registered at the instance of one Sukhnaib Singh, the incumbent Sarpanch of the village, who is on inimical terms with the appellant due to long standing civil and criminal litigations between them. Learned counsel has further argued that the dispute arose purely on account of the locking of the dumping ground and not on the basis of the caste of the complainant. Furthermore, it is argued that the essential ingredients of Section 3 (1)(r) of the SC/ST Act are not made out as there are no specific allegations that the appellant knew that the complainant belonged to a Scheduled Caste or that the alleged abuses were uttered with intent to humiliate her on the ground of caste. To buttress his arguments, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court titled as Gurucharan Singh vs. State of Punjab , 2024 SCC Online P&H 14105, to contend that a mere exchange of abuses in a personal or village dispute does not attract the provisions of the SC/ST Act unless there is a clear intention to humiliate the victim on account of her caste. It has been further submitted that the appellant is a widow of an Army personnel and has clean antecedents. Learned counsel has further argued that the appellant has been willing to join investigation and extend cooperation. On the basis of aforesaid submission, the grant of anticipatory bail is entreated for.

4. Learned State counsel (on the strength of advance notice) has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant by arg