The appellant sought pre-arrest bail after the High Court dismissed his appeal against the Trial Court’s rejection. The case originates from an FIR (First Information Report) alleging the appellant’s involvement in a conspiracy to abduct and intimidate a complainant, a member of a Scheduled Caste, over land transfer for a temple trust, including a caste slur. The Supreme Court granted the appeal, directing the appellant’s release on bail if arrested, citing that the caste slur was not made in public view, and the appellant’s direct involvement in the abduction was only inferential. The court emphasised that this decision did not express an opinion on the case’s merits.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 438 – Anticipatory bail – Prayer for – FIR under Sections 364, 511, 307, 343, 419, 506, 120B, and 34 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – From a prima facie examination of the FIR, it is very clear that there is only one alleged instance of an insult/caste slur but there is no allegation that such offending statement was made in the presence of members of the general public – Hence, an essential ingredient for attracting Sections 2(1)(r) and 2(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act, i.e., that such statement must be made within “public view is prima facie not made out from the FIR – Allegations regarding the appellant’s involvement in the alleged conspiracy for respondent no. 3’s abduction and criminal intimidation are only inferential in nature, which can be established during trial – The relationship between the parties, as evident from the FIR itself is that the appellant and the complainant were associated for a long time (since 2012) with the temple’s activities, for which a Trust was formed that named both of them as trustees – It was only in 2017 that certain disputes arose between them and multiple civil suits regarding the temple’s properties and funds were instituted by the appellant – Held that in light of this overall perspective and considering the allegations in the FIR appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail – Direct that in the event the appellant is arrested in connection with FIR he shall be released on bail subject to such terms and conditions as the Trial Court may deem fit to impose.
(Para 5 to 8)
Deepak Kumar Tala V. State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
Supreme Court: 2025 INSC 390: (DoJ 25-03-2025)
