Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 37 (CHH)

Rakesh Kumar Mishras v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2002-05-22

FAKHRUDDIN, VACATION

body2002
ORDER Fakhruddin, Vacation J. 1. This is an application filed by the applicants under Section 438, Cr.PC for grant of anticipatory bail. 2. The applicants are accused in Crime No. 71/2001, registered in Police Station, Balco Nagar, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506/34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(iv) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short 'the Act'). 3. A perusal of the order passed by the learned Special Judge goes to show that prima facie an offence under Section 3(1)(iv) of the Act is made out. Section 18 of the Act excludes the applicability of Section 438 of the Cr.PC in respect of any case involving arrest of any person accused having committed an offence under this Act. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicants relied upon a judgment in the case of Narhari Prasad v. State of M.P., reported in 2001 Cr.LR (MP) 101. In that case, the High Court while granting bail recorded a categorical finding that as the offence was not committed by the applicants against the victims on the basis that those persons belonging to SC and ST. That is not the case here. Each and every case depends upon its own merits. There cannot be strait-jacket formula; especially the application itself is not maintainable. This question has already been considered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Surendra KumarAgrawal v. State of M.P., reported in 2001 (I) MPJR 399, and the Apex Court has also considered the matter in great detail in the case of State of M.P. and Anr. v. Ram Krishna Balothia and Anr., reported in 1995 MPLJ 303. 5. Having thus considered the facts and circumstances of the case material on record, in view of the provisions as contained in Section 18 of the Act and in view of the law laid down in the aforesaid cases, the application is not maintainable. The application is rejected. 6. However, the applicants may surrender and thereafter apply for regular bail before the Competent Court, which shall be considered as early as possible preferably on that very day, in accordance with law. 7. With this observation, the petition stands disposed of.