SATYENDRA Vs. STATE OF M.P. & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has filed this appeal under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (for short "the SCST Act").

(2.) The short facts for deciding this appeal are that on 13/2/2016 complainant Mohar Bai lodged an oral FIR at Police Station Nai Sarai of Ashok Nagar district stating that on 12/2/2016 co-accused Monu Raghuvanshi had took away her minor daughter/respondent No. 2/the prosecutrix in her presence on his motorcycle by giving her allurements. She has also stated in the FIR that the co-accused knows that they belong to the Scheduled Caste community. The police recorded the FIR at Crime No. 13/2016 and registered a case against the co-accused under Sections 363 and 366-A of the IPC and 3 (2) (v) of the SCST Act. Later, the police added the charges against the co-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376 of the IPC and 8 of the POCSO Act. In the course of investigation, it has come on record that the co- accused had used the motorcycle of the appellant in commission of the crime. Therefore, he is also made an accused of the case.

(3.) The appellant filed the bail application under Section 438 of the CrPC for grant of anticipatory bail before the Special Judge (Atrocities) Ashoknagar. Vide the impugned bail order dated 9/1/2018, learned Special Judge (Atrocities) dismissed his bail application holding that it is not maintainable. However, in the impugned bail order the reasons for non-maintainability of the bail application are not given.