LexKIRAN versus RAJKUMAR JIVRAJ JAIN & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 283 : 2025 INSC 1067 Kiran v. Rajkumar Jivraj Jain & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 3867 of 2025) 01 September 2025 [B.R. Gavai, CJI, K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was correct in allowing the pre-arrest bail to respondent-accused u/s.438 Cr.PC in respect of alleged commission of offenses punishable u/ss.118(1), 115(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 333, 324(4), 76, 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and u/ss.3(1)(o), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.438 – Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – ss.118 (1), 115(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 333, 324(4), 76, 351(3), 352 – Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – ss.3(1)(o), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 18 – Allegation that the accused persons beat the complainant with iron rod and threatened to burn the house – The word “Mangatyano” was used with a clear intention to humiliate the complainant because he belonged to the said Scheduled Caste community – The mother and aunt of the appellant-complainant were also meted out similar treatment – FIR registered – Respondent- accused sought anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the trial Court – However, the High Court granted anticipatory bail – Correctness: Held: 1. The High Court in proceeding to evaluate the testimony of witnesses and to opine on that basis that there were certain discrepancies, no offence was made out, committed a manifest error – The anticipatory bail granted by overlooking of and disregarding the bar of s.18 of the 1989 Act was a clear illegality * Author 284 [2025] 9 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports and jurisdictional error committed by the High Court – The order of the High Court could not be sustained in the eye of law. [Para 9] 2. The provision of s.18 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes, Act, 1989 with express language excludes the applicability of s.438, Cr.PC, it creates a bar against grant of anticipatory bail in absolute terms in relations 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 absolute nature of bar, however, could be read and has to be applied with a rider – Where on the face of it the offence u/s.3 of the Act is found to have not been made out and that the accusations relating to the commission of such offence are devoid of prima facie merits, the Court has a room to exercise the discretion to grant anticipatory bail to the accused u/s.438 of the Code – In the instant case, the said abusive utterances and conduct by the accused, the caste nexus was established – The complainant was humiliated with casteist and abusive approach for the reason that he did not vote in favour of particular candidate one accused no.8 in the Assembly Election as desired by the respondent-accused – In the present case, the incident took place outside the house of the appellant which could be viewed by anybody – It was indeed a place within public view – There is no gainsaying that in the facts of the case all ingredients necessary to prima facie constitute offences u/s.3 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Act, 1989 as alleged in the FIR stood satisfied. [Paras 6, 6.1, 7.1, 8] Case Law Cited State of M.P. & Anr. v. Ram Krishna Balothia & Anr. [1995] 1 SCR 897 : (1995) 3 SCC 221; Vilas Pandurang Pawar v. State of Maharashtra [2012] 8 SCR 270 : (2012) 8 SCC 795; Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India [2020] 2 SCR 727 : (2020) 4 SCC 727 – relied on. Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab [1994] 2 SCR 375 : (1994) 3 SCC 569; Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand [2020] 9 SCR 593 : (2020) 10 SCC 710; Ramesh Chandra Vaish v. State of U.P. [2023] 6 SCR 643 : 2023 SCC OnLine SC 668; Shajan Skaria v. The State of Kerala & Anr. [2024] 8 SCR 1086 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2249; Karuppudayar v. State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Lalguid Trichy & Ors. [2025] 1 SCR 1381: 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2015; Swaran Singh & Ors. v. State through Standing Counsel & Anr. [2008] 12 SCR 132 – referred to. [2025] 9 S.C.R. 285 Kiran v. Rajkumar Jivraj Jain & Anr. List of Acts Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Sc
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.