Madhya Pradesh HC denies bail to 'journalists' in SC/ST case

Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh), Oct 2 (IANS) The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail pleas of individuals who claimed to be journalists and were accused of blackmailing and physically assaulting a Dalit woman teacher in Dhar’s Sardarpur.

A single-judge bench of Justice Gajendra Singh denied relief to Mukesh Kumawat and Mohit Jat, who were accused in a case under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The judge observed that the statutory bar on grant of anticipatory bail under Section 18 of the Act applied, as the allegations in the FIR disclosed a prima facie case of caste-based insult and humiliation.

Allegedly, the accused not only blackmailed and physically assaulted a Dalit woman teacher, but also demanded Rs 1 lakh and threatened to circulate videos defaming her. During the altercation, they also used casteist slurs.

Rejecting their bail plea, the MP High Court observed: "The contents of the First Information Report disclose a prima facie case. The word 'Chindi Chor', if translated, means 'petty thief' or 'miserly thief'. Accordingly, the intention of humiliation or insult of the accused is inferred."

Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Kiran vs. Rajkumar Jivraj Jain case, Justice Singh emphasised that anticipatory bail cannot be granted where allegations under the SC/ST Act are prima facie established.

"The provision of Section 18 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989, with express language excludes the applicability of Section 438 Cr.P.C., it creates a bar against the grant of anticipatory bail in absolute terms in relation to the arrest of a person who faces specific accusations of having committed the offence under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Act. The benefit of anticipatory bail for such an accused is taken off," the order stated.

Rejecting the bail pleas, the Madhya Pradesh High Court said: "Accordingly, the trial court has properly recorded the finding that this is a case where the bar under Section 18 of the SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989 applies and that finding is proper."

--IANS

pds/vd