MAHADEVAMMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the petition filed by the petitioner - -accused No. 1 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail to direct the respondent police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences under Section 420 R/w Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(9) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, registered by the respondent police in Crime No. 6/2014.

(2.) HEARD the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner - -accused No. 1 and also learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - -State.

(3.) AS against this, learned High Court Government Pleader during the course of his argument submitted that since the alleged offences are also under the provisions of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, there is a bar under Section 18 of the said Act to entertain the petition and to grant anticipatory bail. He also made the submission that prosecution placed the prima facie material to show the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offences. The learned High Court Government Pleader also made the submission that as the name of the complainant as well as the petitioner - -accused No. 1, are one and the same taking undue advantage of the same, the petitioner impersonated the complainant before the Bank authorities and barrowed the loan of Rs. 1,79,000/ - and thereby cheated the complainant. The learned HCGP also made the submission that there is a prima facie material placed by the prosecution about the involvement of the petitioner and hence, she is not entitled for anticipatory bail.