NAIN SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since all the aforesaid bail petitions arise out of the same F.I.R. therefore, these are disposed of by this single order.

(2.) Case of the prosecution in brief is that the fore-fathers of complainant Amar Singh had constructed a Room to carry on the Smithy work on a portion of the land of accused-Petitioner Nain Singh. In February, 1998, said room was demolished by said Nain Singh and his family members without the consent of said Amar Singh. When the complainant enquired from Nain Singh as to why he had demolished his room, he was informed that the site was to be converted into a field. The complainant out of ignorance and also due to fear of Nain Singh let the matter end there. However, Nain Singh instigated the other bail Petitioners and one Bhoop Singh against the complainant and his family members and also won over three families of the brother-hood of the complainant. In February, 1999, Police recovered illicit timber from the possession of Petitioner Nain Singh. Said Nain Singh held the complainant responsible for the seizure of timber by the police. In this regard, a meeting of the villagers was held and in the meeting the complainant was penalised to give one He-Goat and a sum of Rs. 100/- for complaining against Nain Singh. The complainant refused to oblige. Thereafter, the complainant and his family members who are Lohar and, therefore Scheduled Caste, have been continuously debarred by the accused-Petitioners and said Bhoop Singh who all are Brahmins by Caste from entering the Temple of the local Diety and also from taking water from the Tap. As and when his family members attempted to go to the temple or to bring the water from the Tank, they are prevented by the accused from doing so because of their being Lohars by caste. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, case F.I.R. No. 45/99 dated 6.7.1999 under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), has been registered against the accused Petitioners and said Bhoop Singh and is presently at the stage of the investigation. The accused-Petitioners have applied for grant of anticipatory bail to them on the common ground that the allegations levelled against them are false and have been levelled with a view to implicate them in a false case.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the bail Petitioners and the learned Additional Advocate General for the State.