LexSHAJAN SKARIA versus THE STATE OF KERALA & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 8 S.C.R. 1086 : 2024 INSC 625 Shajan Skaria v. The State of Kerala & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 2622 of 2024) 23 August 2024 [J.B. Pardiwala* and Manoj Misra, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 imposes an absolute bar on the grant of anticipatory bail in cases registered under the said Act; when can it be said that a prima facie case is made out in a given FIR/complaint; whether the averments in the FIR/complaint in question disclose commission of any offence under Section 3(1)(r) or under Section 3(1)(u) of the 1989 Act; whether mere knowledge of the caste identity of the complainant is sufficient to attract the offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the 1989 Act. Headnotes† Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – s.18 – Bar on the grant of anticipatory bail, if absolute: Held: No – s.18 does not impose an absolute bar on the power of the courts to examine whether a prima facie case attracting the provisions of the 1989 Act is made out or not – The bar created by ss.18 and 18-A(i) shall not apply, if the complaint does not make out a prima facie case for applicability of the provisions of the 1989 Act and thus, the Court would not be precluded from granting pre-arrest bail to the accused persons – s.18 bars anticipatory bail only in those cases where a valid arrest of the accused person can be made as per Section 41 read with Section 60A of CrPC. [Paras 35, 41] Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – “prima facie” – When can a prima facie case be said to be made out in a given FIR/complaint – Bar of s.18, when not applicable: Held: Prima facie, a Latin term translates to “at first sight” or “based on first impression” – The expression “where no prima * Author [2024] 8 S.C.R. 1087 Shajan Skaria v. The State of Kerala & Anr. facie materials exist warranting arrest in a complaint or FIR” means “when based on first impression, no offence is made out as shown in the FIR or the complaint” – Thus, when the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under the 1989 Act are not made out upon the prima facie reading of the complaint or FIR, no case can be said to exist prima facie and the bar of Section 18 would not apply and the courts would not be absolutely precluded from granting pre-arrest bail to the accused persons on its own merits – However, if the complaint has all the ingredients necessary for constituting the offence, then the remedy of anticipatory bail will not be available to the accused – Courts should conduct a preliminary inquiry to determine if the narration of facts in the complaint/FIR in fact discloses the essential ingredients required to constitute an offence under the 1989 Act to ensure that no unnecessary humiliation is caused to the accused – Words “having committed an offence under this Act” denote that it is only when the accusation in the complaint clearly points towards the commission of an offence under the 1989 Act that the bar of Section 18 would apply. [Paras 48-52] Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – s.3(1)(r), 3(1)(u) – Appellant, Editor of an online news channel published a video on YouTube allegedly making derogatory statements and levelling various allegations against the complainant – Ingredients necessary to constitute offences under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(u), if prima face disclosed in the FIR – Offence under Sections 3(1) (r) and 3(1)(u), if made out: Held: No – All insults or intimidations to a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe will not amount to an offence under the 1989 Act, unless such insult or intimidation is on the ground that the victim belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe – Offence under Section 3(1)(r) is not established merely on the fact that the complainant is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, unless there is an intention to humiliate such a member for the reason that he belongs to such community – In the present case, there is nothing in the transcript of the video in question to indicate even prime facie that the allegations were made by the appellant only on account of the fact that the complainant belongs to a Scheduled Caste – Allegations made by the appellant show that he is at inimical terms with the complainant and his intention may be to
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.