IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:25.02.2026 Buta Singh ... Appellant Vs.

State of Punjab & another ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. D.S. Virk, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

...

Manisha Batra, J. (Oral).

1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘SC/ST Act’)by the appellant, challenging the order dated 20.08.2025 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana in case arising out of FIR No.260, dated 16.10.2022, registered under Sections 323, 342, 506, 148 IPC and Section 3 of the SC/ST Act, at Police Station Jamalpur, District Ludhiana, whereby an application for grant of anticipatory bail had been dismissed.

2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement recorded by complainant – Bhupinder Singh, alleging that on 12.10.2022, he was present in his house, when accused Amrit accompanied by 3-4 unknown persons reached there and took his son Husanpreet with him on the pretext of asking something from him. The complainant followed them to the house of Amrit and on reaching there, he found that after closing the main gate of the house, accused Amrit and others were extending beatings to his son. The complainant asked them to open the gate and also the reason for beating his son and then his son informed that on the same day at about 12:30 P.M., on asking a motorcyclist to help him in keeping a gas cylinder on his motorbike, he had done so without knowing that said cylinder had been stolen one. He disclosed that now accused Amit and others were saying that Husanpreet had stolen the cylinder and were extending beatings to him to disclose the name of his accomplice. The complainant further alleged that accused Amrit and his companions then took his son somewhere in their vehicle where he was extended beatings, his hair were cut from his head and some obscene acts were committed upon him.

3. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The complainant recorded a supplementary statement to the effect that when his friend Varinder Singh had tried to stop Amrit from assaulting son of the complainant, accused Amrit had proclaimed that it was the work of low caste to steal. The former Sarpanch had also threatened his son. Offence under Section 3 of the SC/ST Act was added,. The appellant was nominated as an accused. Apprehending his arrest, he moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which was dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana vide order dated 20.08.2025, by observing that the application was not maintainable in view of the fact contained under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act.

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of a false story. He was not named in the FIR and has been implicated subsequently. There is delay of 04 days in reporting the matter to the police. The offence under Section 3 of the SC/ST Act was added after 01 month of the alleged incident. There is no specific allegation against the appellant. Provisions of Section 3 of the SC/ST Act are not attracted qua him. He has already joined investigation on 20.09.2025 in compliance of order dated 10.09.2025 as passed by this Court. No purpose would be served by detaining him in custody. It is, therefore, argued that the appeal deserves to be allowed.

5. Learned State counsel on 10.09.2025 had admitted that at the time of second occurrence, the appellant was not present but it is submitted by him that the appellant along with co-accused had extended beatings to the son of the complainant, who had sustained 13 injuries. There is no medico legal report to show the factum of the injuries as sustained by son of the complainant.

6. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel fo