KAILASHI AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Meaningful question that arises in this bail application is that Whether the expression 'on an accusation of having committed an offence' in Sec. 18 of the Scheduled Castes/Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Attrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act, 1989') does mean that mere registration of the case under the Act of 1989 would ipso facto attracts the Prohibition of Sec. 18 of the Act of 1989."

(2.) Sec. 18 of Act of 1989 reads thus:

(3.) In Ramesh Prasad Bhanja & Ors. Vs. State of Orissa, (1996 Cr.LJ. 2743 ), it was indicated that an "accusation of having committed an offence under this act does not mean that mere registration of the case under the act would ipso facto attracts the prohibition contained in section 18 of the act. If was observed that the opinion of the police regarding the nature of alleged offence is neither final nor conclusive. Merely because a case is mechanically registered under the act, the provision of section 438 of the Code cannot be said to be inapplicable in each and every case. If the allegations make out a prima-facie case under section 3 or for that matter section 4 and 5 of the Act, the jurisdiction to entertain an application under section 4-38 is definitely ousted. It was further observed that where however the allegations do not make out any prima-facie case punishable under any of the provisions of the Act the bar under section 18 is inapplicable and the provisions 438 can be availed of.