MANJU DEVI versus ONKARJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA @ OMKARJEET SINGH & OTHERS

Citation: [2017] 2 S.C.R. 703 · Decided: 24-03-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.K. AGRAWAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] 2 S.C.R. 703 
MANJU DEVI 
v. 
ONKARJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA @ OMKARJEET SINGH & 
OTHERS 
(Criminal Appeal No.570of2017) 
MARCH 24, 2017 
[R. K. AGRAWAL AND ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.] 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.438 - Anticipatory 
bail granted to the respondents accused of commission of offence 
u!ss.323, 354 and 452 !PC and s.3(1){xi) of SC/ST Act -Appeal by 
complainant - Held: s.438 of the Code is not available in respect of 
offences under the SC/ST Act - Offences enumerated under the 
SC/ST Act fall into a separate and special class - High Court 
committed grave error in granting anticipatory bail lo respondents 
- Constitution of India - Art.17 - Scheduled Castes and the 
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - s.3(/)(xi). 
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of 
Atrocities) Act, 1989: 
s.18 - Exclusion of s.438 Cr.PC in connection with offences 
under the SC/ST Act - Purpose of incorporating s.18 in the Act -
Held: The exclusion to be viewed in the context of the prevailing 
social conditions which give rise to such offences, and the 
apprehension that perpetrators of such atrocities are likely to 
threaten and intimidate their victims and prevent or obstruct them 
in the prosecution of these offenders, if the offenders are allowed 
to avail of anticipatory bail. 
s.3(1)(x1) - Distinction between s.3(1)(xi) and s.354 !PC -
Penal Code, 1860 - s.354. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. The SC/ST Act was enacted in order to prevent 
the commission of atrocities against members of Scheduled 
Castes and Scheduled Tribes and to provide for special courts 
for the trial of offence under the said Act as also to provide for 
the relief and rehabilitation of victims of such offences. It is 
703 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
704 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017) 2 S.C.R. 
undoubtedly true that Section 438 of the Code, which is available 
to an accused in respect of offences under the IPC, is not available 
in respect of offences under the SC/ST Act. The offences 
enumerated under the SC/ST Act fall into a separate and special 
class. Article 17 of the Constitution expressly deals with abolition 
of 'untouchability' and forbids its practice in any form anci also 
provides that enforcement of any disability arising out of 
'untonchability' shall be an offence punishable in accordance.with 
law. The offences, therefore, which are enumerated under Section 
3(1) of the SC/ST Act arise out of the practice of 'untouchability'. 
The use of the word 'Harijan' 'Dhobi' etc. is often used· by people 
belonging to the so-called upper castes as a w9rd of insult, abuse 
and derision. · Calling a person by these names is: nowadays an 
abusive language and is offensive. It is basically used nowadays 
not to denote a caste but to intentionally insult and humiliate 
someone. No community should be today insulted or looked down 
upon, and nobody's feelings should be hurt. (Paras 11, 12 and 14) 
(709-B-C; 711-B-C; 712-F-GJ 
2. Though the Constitution of India abolishes 
'untouchability' but in view of the social attitudes which lead to 
the commission of such offences against Scheduled Castes and 
Scheduled Tribes, there is justification for an apprehension that 
if the benefit of anticipatory bail is made available to the persons 
who are alleged to have committed such offences, there is every 
likelihood of their misusing their liberty while ou anticipatory 
bail to terrorise their victims and to prevent a proper 
investigation. It is in this context that Section 18 has been 
incorporated in the SC/ST Act. The offences which are enumerated 
under Section 3 of the SC/ST Act are offences which denigrate 
members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the· eyes 
of society and prevent them from leading a life of dignity and self-
respect. Such offences are committed to humiliate and subjugate 
members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes with a view 
to keeping them in a state of servitude. These offences constitute 
a separate class and cannot be compared with offences under the 
Penal Code. [Para 15) (712-H; 713-A-C) 
3.1 It is clear that Magistrate carefully perused the 
complaint as well as the statement of the complainant and arrived 
at a conclusion that a prim(l f(lcie case is made against the 
MANJU DEVI v. ONKARJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA @ 
OMKARJEET SINGH & OTHERS 
respondents which was npheld in revision before the Sessions 
Court and even in the High Court. The plea 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.