SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Surendra Raghuwanshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2018

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA.5233/2018
( Surenrdra Raghuvanshi Vs. State of M.P. Anr. )
1

Jabalpur, Dated : 27.08.2018
Shri Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, counsel for the appellant.
Shri Arvind Singh, Govt. Advocate for the respondent

No.1/State.

None for the respondent No.2/complainant despite compliance
of provision of Section 15(A)(III) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act by the respondent No.1.

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This appeal has been filed under Section 14 (A) of SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 09.07.2018
passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
Hoshangabad, whereby learned Judge rejected the bail application filed
by the appellant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to get anticipatory bail in
Crime No.190/2018 registered at Police Station Sohagpur, Distt.
Hoshangabad for the offences under Sections 354, 456, 506/34 of IPC
and Section 3 (2) (5-a) of SC/ST Act, who apprehends his arrest in the
crime.

As per prosecution case, on 03.05.2018 at 10:00 PM applicant
along with three other persons came to prosecutrix’s house and
molested her. On that, the police registered Crime No.190/2018 for the
offences under Sections 354, 456, 506/34 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (5-

a) of SC/ST Act. The appellant filed an application under Section 438
of Cr.P.C. before the Trial Court for grant of anticipatory bail, which
was rejected. Being aggrieved by that order, present appeal has been
filed.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is
innocent and has falsely been implicated in the matter. At the time of
incident, applicant went to the house of prosecutrix to search his
motorcycle where Lakhan Pardhi husband of the prosecutrix, Sagariya
Pardhi, Vinod Pardhi and Shailendra Pardhi assaulted the applicant. In
the incident applicant sustained injuries. On the report of appellant,
Crime No. 209/2018 has been registered at P.S. Sohagpur Distt.
Hoshangabad against Lakhan Pardhi husband of the prosecutrix and
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA.5233/2018
( Surenrdra Raghuvanshi Vs. State of M.P. Anr. )
2

other co-accused persons namely Sagariya Pardhi, Vinod Pardhi and
Shailendra Pardhi due to which prosecutrix lodged false complaint
against the present appellant. So the provisions of Section 18 of SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act are not attracted. Appellant is ready to
cooperate in the investigation and trial. In the event of arrest, his
reputation will be ruined. Hence, counsel prayed for grant of
anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the appeal
stating that during the incident appellant entered into the house of
prosecutrix and molested her, therefore, offences 354, 456, 506/34 of
IPC and under Section 3 (2) (5-a) of the SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 are prima facie also made out against the
applicant, so he should not be released on bail.

Although offence under Sections 3 (2) (5-a) of the SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has been registered against the
appellant and according to Section 18 of the Act provisions of Section
438 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not apply to the persons
committing an offence under the Act, but in Pankaj D. Suthar V/s.
State Of Gujarat reported in (1992) 1 GLR 405 while considering the
scope of Section 18 of the Prevention of Atrocities Act, the Gujarat
High Court observed as under :-

“Section 18 of the Atrocities Act gives a vision, direction and
mandate to the Court as to the cases where the anticipatory
bail must be refused, but it does not and it certainly cannot
whisk away the right of any Court to have a prima facie
judicial scrutiny of the allegations made in the complaint. Nor
can it under its hunch permit provisions of law being abused
to suit the mala fide motivated ends of some unscrupulous
complainant.”

Apex Court also in the case of Vilas Pandurang and another
V/s. State of Maharashtra and others reported in (2012) 8 SCC 795
held as under :-

“The scope of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act read with Section
438 of the Code is such that it creates a specific bar in the
grant of anticipatory bail. When an offence is registered
against a person under the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, no Court shall entertain application for
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA.5233/2018
( Surenrdra Raghuvanshi Vs. State of M.P. Anr. )
3

anticipatory bail, unless it prima facie finds that such an
offence is not made out. Moreover, while considering the
application for bail, scope for appreciation of evidence and
other material on record is limited. Court is not expected to
indulge in critical analysis of the evidence on record.”

The Apex Court also in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath
Mahajan reported in 2018 SCC OnLine SC 243 held that the bar
under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act 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.

This shows that in the crime registered for the offences under
Atrocity Act anticipatory bail can be granted when it is prima facie
found that such an offence is not made out or accused/applicant is
able to show to the court the existence of malice and ill-will in the
registration of the FIR.

It appears from the record that in the incident appellant
sustained injuries and on the report of the appellant, Crime No.
209/2018 was registered against the husband of the complainant.
Applicant also filed the copy of the FIR lodged by him regarding
theft of his Bike. So prima facie contention of the learned lawyer of
the applicant appears to be probable.

So looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, without
commenting on merits, the appeal is allowed and it is directed that in
the event of arrest of appellant in Crime No.190/2018 registered at
Police Station Sohagpur, Hoshangabad, the present appellant be
released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety
of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Station
House Officer.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA.5233/2018
( Surenrdra Raghuvanshi Vs. State of M.P. Anr. )
4

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the
following conditions by the appellant :

1. The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of
the bond executed by him;

2. The appellant will co-operate in the investigation/trial, as the
case may be;

3. The appellant will not indulge himself in extending inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police
Officer, as the case may be;

4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence
of which he is accused;

5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial; and

6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission
of the Trial Court/ Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned court for
compliance.

Accordingly, appeal is disposed of.

C.c. as per rules.

(Rajeev Kumar Dubey)
Judge
sarathe

Digitally signed by
NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Date: 2018.08.28
10:57:14 +05’30’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation