The High Court declined to grant anticipatory bail on Criminal Appeal No.14974 of 2013, holding that specific allegations of caste-based insult under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act precluded such relief.
No anticipatory bail granted; criminal petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
CRL.P.No.14974 of 2013
ORDER
The petitioner–accused apprehends arrest in Cr.No.230 of 2013 of Badvel (U) Police Station, Badvel, Kadapa District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 506 IPC and Section 3 (i) (x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short ‘the Act’).
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State.
It is alleged in the First Information Report that the petitioner abused the de facto complainant in his caste name while he was collecting donations and tried to beat him and insulted him.
In view of the specific allegations attracting the offence under Section 3 (i) (x) of the Act, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
_____________ R.KANTHA RAO,J
30th December, 2013 rkk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the allegations involve abuse in caste name and insult under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Interpretation of Section 3 (i) (x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in bail applications.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
State
R.KANTHA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
