Anticipatory Bail Is Permissible Under SC/ST Act Only If Prima Facie Offence Isn't Made Out : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that a grant of anticipatory bail is impermissible under the SC/ST Act unless is prima facie shown that no offence under the Act is made out.

"where on the face of it the offence under Section 3 of the Act is found to have not been made out and that the accusations relating to the commission of such offence are devoid of prima facie merits, the Court has a room to exercise the discretion to grant anticipatory bail to the accused under Section 438 of the Code.”, the court observed.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, along with Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice N.V. Anjaria, allowed the complainant's appeal and set aside the Bombay High Court's order granting anticipatory bail to Respondent No. 1, who had allegedly abused and humiliated the appellant in public by referring to his caste name.

Noting that a prima facie case was made out as the ingredients of the offences punishable under Section 3 of the SC/ST Act were made out, the judgment authored by Justice Anjaria observed:

“The accused persons beat the complainant with iron rod and threatened to burn the house. The mother and aunt of the appellant-complainant were also meted out similar treatment with intimidation and were addressed with same casteist slur. The use of the word “Mangatyano” was with a clear intention to humiliate the complainant because he belonged to the said Scheduled Caste community. In the said abusive utterances and conduct by the accused, the caste nexus was established. The complainant was humiliated with casteist and abusive approach for the reason that he did not vote in favour of particular candidate one Bahubali-accused No.8 in the Assembly Election as desired by the respondent accused.”

However, the Court clarified that while concluding that a prima facie case is made out or not, it would not be permissible for the Courts to enter into the evidentiary realm upon holding a mini-trial.

“Non-making of prima facie case about the commission of offence is perceived to be such a situation where the Court can arrive at such a conclusion in the first blush itself or by way of the first impression upon very reading of the averments in the FIR. The contents and the allegations in the FIR would be decisive in this regard. Furthermore, in reaching a conclusion as to whether a prima facie offence is made out or not, it would not be permissible for the Court to travel into the evidentiary realm or to consider other materials, nor the Court could advert to conduct a mini trial.”, the court said.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.

Cause Title: KIRAN VERSUS RAJKUMAR JIVRAJ JAIN & ANR.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 869

Click here to read/download the judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, Adv. Ms. Srishty Pandey, Adv. Mr. B Dhananjay, Adv. M/S. Juristrust Law Offices, AOR

For Respondent(s) : R-1 Mr. Dilip Annasaheb Taur, AOR Mr. Amol V Deshmukh, Adv.

R-2 Ms. Ira Mahajan, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.