NEW DELHI — The Calcutta High Court has ruled that alleged caste-based abuses hurled over the telephone, and not in any place within public view, would not prima facie attract the stringent provisions of the SC/ST Act.
While disposing of an application for anticipatory bail, a single judge Bench of Justice Jay Sengupta observed that since the allegations in the FIR pertained to abuses allegedly made over a phone call, the essential ingredients of Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 were not made out at the prima facie stage.
“Considering the fact that the alleged abuses were hurled over the telephone and not in public view, the provisions of the special Act would not be prima facie attracted, and consequently the application for anticipatory bail would not be maintainable,” the high court said in its order.
Justice Sengupta was hearing an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, wherein the petitioner contended that there was no prima facie case under the SC/ST Act, and that the remaining offences invoked in the FIR were bailable in nature.
Opposing the plea, the prosecution relied on the case diary and statements of witnesses.
However, the Calcutta High Court said that this was a “peculiar case” where, apart from the provisions of the special Act, the other allegations were bailable.
Taking note of the overall facts, Justice Sengupta disposed of the anticipatory bail application by granting the petitioner liberty to surrender before the jurisdictional court and seek regular bail within four weeks.
“If such an application for bail is made by the petitioner, the same shall be considered in accordance with law,” the bench directed, clarifying that the petitioner will not be arrested during the said four-week period.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court, in a separate case, ruled that abusing a person by caste name within the “four corners of the chambers” of a public official, where members of the public are not present, would not constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act, and accordingly quashed the criminal proceedings arising from such allegations. — IANS
