SATYAM FOUJDAR Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant in connection with Crime No. 69/2018 of Police Station Kareli District Narsinghpur for offences under Sections 294, 323 and 506 / 34 of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) (va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

(2.) The appellant herein is apprehending his arrest in the aforesaid case. The allegations against him is that he along with the other co-accused assaulted the respondent No. 2 and caused a minor injury to him. Inter alia, the appellant has also been booked under the provisions of SC/ ST Act. The IPC offences are all bailable in nature but, in view of Section 3(2) (va) of the SC/ ST Act, the said offences of IPC, when committed against a member of the SC/ST community, the offences become non-bailable. Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court examined the ambit and scope of anticipatory bail in Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan vs The State Of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No. 416/18 decided on 20th March, 2018.

(3.) In this judgment, the two Judge Bench of Hon'ble the Supreme Court has re-examined the issue of anticipatory bails in offences under the SC/ ST Act and the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ ST Act. In various paragraphs, the Supreme Court has categorically held that the bar under Section 18 would apply only, where there is prima facie case of an offence having been committed by the accused against a member of the SC/ST community. However, in the event the accused/applicant is able to show to the court the existence of malice and ill-will in the registration of the FIR, then the bar of Section 18 of SC/ ST Act would not apply. In paragraph-81 of the said judgment, the Supreme Court laid down "Accordingly, we direct that in absence of any other independent offence calling for arrest, in respect of offences under the Atrocities Act, no arrest may be effected, if an accused person is a public servant, without written permission of the appointing authority and if such a person is not a public servant, without written permission of the Senior Superintendent of Police of the District. Such permissions must be granted for recorded reasons which must be served on the person to be arrested and to the concerned court. As and when a person arrested is produced before the Magistrate, the Magistrate must apply his mind to the reasons recorded and further detention should be allowed only if the reasons recorded are found to be valid. To avoid false implication, before FIR is registered, preliminary enquiry may be made whether the case falls in the parameters of the Atrocities Act and is not frivolous or motivated.