ORDER 1. This is an application u/s. 438 Cr. P. C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant-petitioner who has been accused of the offence under Section 294 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. Section 18 of the Act provides that nothing in Section 438 of the Code shall apply in relation to any case involving the arrest of any person on an accusation of having committed an offence under this Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner accused has submitted that the bar of Sec. 18 of the Act shall not apply in the instant case because there is in fact no accusation of having committed an offence under this Act. Learned counsel contends that in order to constitute an accusation of an offence under this Act the ingredients of the offence must be stated clearly by the complainant and/or other eye-witnesses in the statements recorded by the police so as to attract the provision of Sec 18 of the Act, which denies the remedy of anticipatory bail Before considering the police statements in the Police-case-diary it would be pertinent to refer to the offence mentioned under Sec. 3 (1) (x) of the Act which reads thus : 3 (1) (x) intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within Public view (Emphasis supplied) X X X X 4. Adverting to the statements made to the Police by the complainant and her brother it is apparent that while the complainant was working as one of the laborers and picking up bricks the stack of bricks had fallen whereupon the complainant scolded her by uttering falthy abuses commencing with the words "CHAMARAN ACHHOOT". It is however, not stated by the complainant or her brother that the accused intentionally insulted or intimidated with intent to humiliate the complainant as a member of Schedule Cast. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a strict construction should be placed on the word 'accusation" used in Sec. 18 of the Act which has the effect of taking away the remedy of grant of bail u/s. 438 Cr. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a strict construction should be placed on the word 'accusation" used in Sec. 18 of the Act which has the effect of taking away the remedy of grant of bail u/s. 438 Cr. P. C. The learned counsel, therefore, contends that unless the Police statements of the complainant and other eye-witnesses clearly allege 'intentional insult' or "intent to humiliate" the complainant because of her belonging to Scheduled Caste, the accusation of the offence u/s. 3 (1) (x) of the Act within the meaning of the word "accusation" used in Section 18 of the Act cannot be spelt out so as to exclude the applicability of Section 438 Cr.P.C. 6. In support of his submission learned counsel has placed reliance on two decisions of this Court; in Tulsabai (Smt.) v. State of M. P. 1992 (1) MPWN 2 and in Arun kumar Sharma v. State of M. P. 1991 (2) MPWN 92. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having given careful consideration to the submission of the learned counsel and the material in the Police Case-diary, I am of the opinion that a strict construction should be placed on the word "accusation" within the meaning of Section 18 of the Act. As such, the 'intention' or 'intent' which is material ingredient of the offence under Sec 3 (1) (X) of the Act not being clearly stated by the witnesses and there being no statement that the offence was committed because the complainant belonged to Scheduled Caste, it cannot amount to an 'accusation' of an offence within the meaning of Sec 18 of the Act so as to bar an application u/s. 438 Cr. P. C. I, therefore, hold that Sec. 18 of the Act is not attracted in this case and the application u/s. 438 Cr. P. C. is maintainable. 8. Considering the merits of the case, I deem it fit to order and do hereby order that in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No. 55/92 of P. S. Rajgarh (Biaora) the applicant shall be released on bail in a sum of Rs. 5000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned police officer on the following conditions. (i) That the applicant-accused shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. 5000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned police officer on the following conditions. (i) That the applicant-accused shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. (ii) That the accused-applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer; and (iii) That the applicant-accused shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.