SHANGARA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.83 dtd. 8/7/2021 registered under Ss. 323 and 506 of the IPC and Ss. 3 (1) (s) and 3 (1) (r) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 at Police Station Boha, District Mansa.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners have joined investigation in terms of order passed by this Court dtd. 8/10/2021. Order dtd. 8/10/2021 is as under:-

(3.) Once, the similarly situated co-accused has been granted the benefit of interim bail, the same cannot be denied to the petitioners unless and until any differentiating fact between them is pointed out. The factum of difference pointed out by the learned counsel for the complainant qua petitioner No.3 Baljit Singh is with regard to the uttering of certain words which violates the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The said allegations are yet to be proved in the Court of law, hence, the said allegations cannot be treated as a differentiating fact as of now so as to deny the benefit of parity to petitioner No.3 as well.