JUDGMENT Petitioner is arrayed as accused in Crime No.532/2020 of the Peruvannamoozhy Police Station. He is indicted for the offences under Sections 323, 353, 354, 506, 294(b) IPC and Section3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short SC/SC Act). 2. Prosecution case is that, on 05.12.2020, the accused threatened the defacto complainant and caused harm to her body and abused her with obscene words and thereafter caught hold of her hand, with intend to outrage her modesty. The defacto complainant was employed on duty at kakkayam Reserve Forest and that she was called by her caste name. 3. The petitioner has a specific case that the entire allegations are false as the petitioner is one of the leaders of an agitation on behalf of the farmers against the illegal acts of the Forest department. 4. Even though initially after hearing the learned counsel for either side, the judgment was reserved, subsequently, the case was put up for further hearing on 27.04.2021 since this Court felt it necessary to peruse the case diary. The case diary was made available by the learned Prosecutor. 5. On a perusal of the case diary, it is seen that initially, the offence under the SC/ST Act was not alleged against the accused. At the first point of time ie, on 05.12.2020 the offence alleged against the petitioner was only under Sections 323, 353, 354 and 506 of IPC. It was much later that Section 294(b) IPC was added. Even at that point, the offence under SC/ST Act was not charged against the petitioner. Thereafter the offence under the SC/ST Act was incorporated only on 28.12.2020. 6. On a consideration of the nature of the case and the circumstances arising, I am of the prima facie opinion that, a case under the SC/ST Act is not seen made out against the accused. Looking at the nature of the allegations and the circumstances in which the crime has been registered, I am also of the prima facie view that the inclusion of the said statute was done with some ulterior purposes. In view of the above, the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ ST Act will not apply and petitioner is entitled to be released on bail in the event of his arrest and I do so, however subject to the following conditions. In view of the above, the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ ST Act will not apply and petitioner is entitled to be released on bail in the event of his arrest and I do so, however subject to the following conditions. (i) In the event of the petitioner being arrested, he shall be released on bail on executing a bond with two solvent sureties for a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty five thousand only) for the like amount. (ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer once in four weeks between 10.00 AM and 12.00 PM on a Saturday of his choice. (iii) The petitioner shall not intimidate any witnesses nor shall influence in any manner the conduct of investigation in the case. The Crl.Appeal is allowed as above.