JUDGMENT

This appeal arises out of order in Crl.M.C.No.1365/2022 on the files of the Special Judge, Kozhikode, under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘The SC/ST Act’ hereinafter) dated 24.8.2022. The appellant is the accused/petitioner in the above petition who involved in Crime No.268/2022 of Mavoor Police Station.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State.

3. Though notice served upon the de facto complainant, he did not turn up.

4. Prosecution allegation is that the appellant/accused who does not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community, on 22.6.2022, while the election in relation to Milk Producers Co-operative Society, Mavoor was going on, the accused along with two other persons tresspassed upon the polling booth and caught hold on the neck of the de facto complainant, who belongs to Scheduled Caste community, and beat on his face by using a stone like weapon. The further allegation is that, he called his caste name at the booth knowing that that the de facto complainant is a member of the Scheduled Caste community. On these sets fact, the prosecution would allege that the appellant/accused committed offences under Sections 341, 323, 324 r/w Section 34 IPC and under Section 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

5. Apprehending arrest in the above crime, the appellant approached the Special Judge and by the order impugned, produced as Annexure 1, the learned Special Judge dismissed the application holding that since a prima facie case is made out, grant of anticipatory bail is specifically barred under Section 18 and 18A of The SC/ST Act.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there was no occurrence and there were altercation between certain persons at the booth and the appellant has not done anything as alleged by the prosecution and therefore he is liable to be released on anticipatory bail.

7. To the contrary, the learned Public Prosecutor zealously opposed grant of bail to the appellant on the submission that, in this matter, commission of offence under Section 3(1)(s) of The SC/ST Act is prima facie made out and in such a case, grant of anticipatory bail is specifically barred.

Therefore the order impugned is liable to be sustained.

8. I have perused the First Information Statement in this case.

There is specific allegation made by the de facto complainant that the accused herein called his caste name at the booth and thereby the appellant abused the de facto complainant by calling his caste name within public view. It is pertinent to note that Section 3(1)(s) of The SC/ST Act provides that whoever not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, abuses any member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe by caste name in any place within public view, the same is an offence. Prima facie the offence under Section 3(1)(s) of The SC/ST Act is made out, in the case on hand. In such a case, the bar under Section 18 and 18A of the SC/ST Act would apply. Therefore, anticipatory bail cannot be granted. Therefore, the order impugned does not require interference and is confirmed. In the result, the appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is ready to surrender before the Special Court and he would seek regular bail. The submission is recorded and the liberty of the appellant to move so is kept in tact, since grant of regular bail can be considered by the Special Court in merits. Therefore, it is ordered that if the appellant surrenders before the Special Court and files regular bail, application for the same shall be considered expeditiously without much delay.