Dismissed

Lakhwinder Singh and Ors. v. Kirpal Singh & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Aug 2010CRM-M/24690/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. held that the allegations prima facie attract the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Relying on Swarn Singh, it found Section 18 bars anticipatory bail, dismissing the petition without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petition for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.

Lakhwinder Singh and Ors. Vs Kirpal Singh & Anr. — Caste Atrocities | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl.M.No.M-24690 of 2010 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl.M.No.M-24690 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 25, 2010

¶5

Lakhwinder Singh and others

¶6

.....Petitioners

¶7

¶8

Kirpal Singh and another

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr.S.K.Vohra, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶13

The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in criminal complaint No.85/09 dated 5.5.2009, titled as Kirpal Singh v. Lakhwinder Singh and others, pending in the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Baba Bakala.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully.

¶15

Brief allegations against the petitioners are that complainant belongs to scheduled caste whereas petitioners-accused belong to nonscheduled caste and this fact was known to the petitioners being in the same village. Complainant is Ex-member of Panchayat. On 19.4.2009, complainant was returning to his house in Village Bhorshi from Nanakpura and at about 5.00 p.m., when he reached near crossing of the village, then he was waylaid by the petitioners-accused. They abused him in the name of his caste. Firstly petitioner-accused Lakhwinder Singh uttered the words that **Kutia churia tue sadei khilaf case karke stay lia hai'.** Then Narinder Singh uttered the words that **Kute Chure nueu sade uchi jati valian nal panga lein da maja chakha deo.'** Then petitioner Gurjit Singh uttered the words **is kute chure nueu pind vich nahin rehan dena.'** In the last Arasdeep Singh uttered the words that Kutia churia tuen apna case vapas lai lai, nahin tau tueue jana mar devange.' Thereafter all the accused

¶16

-2-

¶17

Crl.M.No.M-24690 of 2010 (O&M)

¶18

uttered the words that ` Tueu pind vich gand paia hai, tenu kuta chure nuen ajj jano mar dena hai, and gave beatings to the complainant and put off his turban. He raised alarm, which attracted Jaswinder Singh, Jaimal Singh and other people passing thereby and thereafter petitioners-accused ran away after giving threats to the complainant to kill him.

¶19

In view of these facts, prima facie, case for offence under Section 3 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of attrocities) Act (hereinafter to be referred as SC & ST Act') is made out. It has been held by Hon'ble Apex Court in **Swarn Singh v. State through Standing counsel** 2008(4) RCR (Criminal) 74, that merely uttering of word Chamar' is sufficient to attract offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the SC & ST Act, if the same are uttered in public view or at a public place. Hence, Section 18 of the SC & ST Act creates a bar for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners-accused.

¶20

Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitionersLakhwinder Singh, Narinder Singh, Gurjit Singh and Arshdeep Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.

¶21

25.8.2010 meenu

¶22

(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge

Lakhwinder Singh and Ors. v. Kirpal Singh & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhwinder Singh and Ors. v. Kirpal Singh & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jatinder Kaushal @ Vicky Vs State of Punjab

Anil Kumar Vs State of Haryana

M/S Ashok Fruit Agency Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Anr.

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sushil Kumar Vs State of Haryana

D.D. Tiwari Vs U.H.B.V.N.L. and Ors.