GOLUGURI ESWARA REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 Cr. P.C. by petitioners/A -1 & A -2 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with a case in P.R.C. No. 11 of 2011 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Alamuru, East Godavari District registered against the petitioners and others for the offences punishable under Sections 324 read with 34 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(i)(x) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the Act).

(2.) HEARD the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, the Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent -State and perused the material placed on record.

(3.) HOWEVER , coming to the facts, there is a bar under Section 18 of the Act, but for maintainability of the anticipatory bail, as there is a prima facie accusation as accused insulted by way of abuse in public view by touching the caste name of the de facto -complainant to attract the Section 3(1)(x) of the Act. Coming to the bar under Section 18 of the Act, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the proposition of law laid down by the Apex Court in Shobhan Singh Khanka V. State of Jharkhand : (2012)4 SCC 684 drawing attention of this Court to para 22 so also to para 14, wherein it was held that personal liberty is a fundamental right and imposition of conditions as laid down in Section 438 Cr. P.C. are to be applied or not to be specified. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also relied on the decision of this Court in Paracha Mohan Rao V. State of Andhra Pradesh : 2013 (2) ALD (Crl.) 535 (AP), and drawn attention to para 11 which clearly speaks irrespective of the bar under Section 18 of the Act, a bail application is maintainable and it is for the Court to consider whether the allegations in the complaint or F.I.R. attracts the prohibition under Section 18 of the Act or a case to grant anticipatory bail. It is clearly observed at the end of para 11 that when the allegations mentioned in the first information report/complaint in their entirety do not attract a particular offence under the Act, then the High Court or the Court of Session can exercise their discretion to grant anticipatory bail.