JUDGMENT 1. - Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the case diary. 2. An F.I.R. has been registered inter alia against the applicants herein alleging commission of offences under Sections 143, 341, 323 Indian Penal Code. and Section 3(l)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "the SC/ST Act" hereinafter). 3. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that except the offence under Section 3(l)(x) of the SC/ST Act, all other offences alleged to have been committed by the applicants are bailable. The learned counsel submitted that the omnibus allegations regarding abusing the complainant in the name of the caste have been levelled. It is urged by learned counsel that the allegations as contained in the F.I.R. do not constitute an offence under Section 3(l)(x) inasmuch as there is no allegation that the applicants have intentionally insulted or intimidated the complainant in any place in a public view and such insult or intimidation was done with an intention to humiliate the complainant, therefore, no prima facie case regarding commission of offence under Section 3(l)(x) of the SC/ST Act is made out against the applicants. The injuries caused to the victims are simple in nature. Accordingly, it is submitted that the applicants are entitled for protection under Section 438 Criminal Procedure Code. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application on the ground that by virtue of provisions of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act, the provisions of Section 438 Criminal Procedure Code do not apply in relation to any case involving the arrest of any person on an accusation of having committed an offence under the SC/ST Act. 5. Replying the contention of the learned Public Prosecutor, the learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the embargo created by provisions of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act cannot be construed so as to exclude entertainability of an application under Section 438 Criminal Procedure Code altogether, simply because a case under Section 3 or 4 of the SC/ST Act has been registered against any person. The learned counsel submitted that if looking to the nature of accusation, it appears that some bona fide dispute exists between the parties and prima facie, it does not appear that the applicants have committed an offence under Section 3 of the SC/ST Act then, on the given facts and circumstances of the case, such person can always be extended the protection under Section 438 Criminal Procedure Code notwithstanding the embargo created by Section 18 of the SC /ST Act. 6. Having regard to the nature of accusation and taking into consideration totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to extend protection to the accused applicants under Section 438 Criminal Procedure Code. 7. Consequently, the I.O./SHO of Police Station, Badnor District Bhilwara is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants No. (1) Himmat Singh S/o Rajendra Singh (2) Lokpal Singh S/o Govind Singh (3) Govind Singh S/o Bhopal Singh and (4) Maniraj Singh S/o Bhanwar Singh in F.I.R. No. 85/2009, they shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs. 10,000/- each to the satisfaction of the I.O./SHO on the following conditions : (i) They shall make themselves available for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) They 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; (iii) They shall not leave India without the previous permission of the trial Court. Bail application allowed. *******