The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for prior approval and written reasons for arrest, as directed by the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan, in cases under the Act of 1989.

JUDGMENT :

1. Shri H. S. Rajput, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Aseem Dixit, G.A. for the respondent/State. Heard. Case diary perused.

2. This is an appeal filed under section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the impugned order dated 22-1-2018 passed by Special Judge, (S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act) Jabalpur in B.A.No.170/2018 whereby the Court below has dismissed the application filed by the appellant under section 438, Criminal Procedure Code. The appellant is apprehending his arrest for the offence under sections 294, 323, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(2)(va) and 3(1)(d) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1989’) in Crime No.7/2018 registered at Police Station Chargawan, District Jabalpur (M.P.).

3. According to the prosecution story, it is alleged that the appellant is the owner of the bus on which the complainant was working as a Driver. It is alleged that while he demanded arrears of salary, he was abused publicly by referring to his caste and was also slapped and threatened to life. The complainant belongs to the Scheduled Tribe community.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent. As the complainant was preventing the bus to move and making quarrel, he prevented the complainant from making nuisance. Neither he abused or threatened the complainant nor assaulted him. It is further submitted that all the offences except the offence punishable with the Act of 1989 are bailable. It is alleged that in order to deprive the appellant to exercise his right to bail, he has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that Hon’ble the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan vs. State of Maharashtra and another, passed in Cr. Appeal No. 416/2018 decided on 20-3-2018 from paragraphs 81 onwards has issued certain directions in order to prevent misuse of the provisions of the Act of 1989. On these grounds, prayer is made to allow the appeal and either enlarge the appellant on anticipatory bail or issue necessary directions to the I.O. concerned to follow the guidelines/directions issued by the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan (supra) before arresting the appellant.

5. On the other hand, learned G.A. opposed the appeal stating that there is prima facie material to establish the offences punishable under the provisions of the Act of 1989. Hence, it cannot be said that it is a case of misuse of the provisions of the Act of 1989 or causing unnecessary harassment to the appellant. Hence, the appeal as well as prayer for anticipatory bail be rejected.

6. Having considered the contention advanced by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the case diary, in the present case there is an averment in the FIR with regard to commission of the offence punishable with the alleged provisions of the Act of 1989 and there is also evidence on record to support the allegations. There is no other material to arrive at the conclusion that FIR has been lodged malafidely. In such circumstances, in view of the provisions of section 18 of the Act of 1989, the appellant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail.

7. However, in view of the provisions of section 18 of the Act of 1989, an accused, who is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail, cannot be denied the protection available under the law with regard to unjustified and unwarranted arrest, as before arresting an accused, it is the duty of the police officer to examine and record the reasons of arrest in writing subject to scrutiny of the Magistrate/Court. Hon’ble the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan (supra) has considered the principles and guidelines earlier laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court with regard to the duties of the Police Officer while arresting an accused. Reproduction of the aforesaid discussions by the Apex Court