CRA-S-1213-202 IN THE H (204) SIMRANJEET K STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. R Mr. H *** MANISHA BATR 1. The 14A of Scheduled Act, 1989 (for s 01.04.2026 passed in case arising ou 3(1)®, 3(1)(s) of an application for dismissed. 2. Brief that the aforement submitted by the Sangarsh Dal, alle 2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH ET KAUR @ SEEMA Versus PUNJAB AND ANR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab Mr. Harmanpreet Singh, Advocate fo *** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant appeal has been filed b eduled Castes and the Scheduled Tri (for short “SC/ST Act”), thereby sed by the Court of Learned Additi ing out of FIR No.73 dated 20.03.20 (s) of SC/ST Act at Police Station Ga on for grant of anticipatory bail as fi Brief facts relevant for the purpose rementioned FIR was registered on th y the complainant Vikas Singh, Pr al, alleging therein that father of one JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRA-S-1213-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 04.05.2026 ... Appellant ...Respondents ANISHA BATRA for the appellant Punjab ate for respondent No.2 iled by the appellant under Section ed Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) ereby challenging the order dated Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar 0.03.2026 registered under Sections on Gate Hakima, Amritsar, whereby l as filed by the appellant had been rpose of disposal of this appeal are on the basis of a written complaint gh, President of Bhagwan Balmiki f one Vanshdeep Singh had expired 2026 s ction ities) ated ritsar tions reby n l are laint lmiki pired AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1213-202 on 15.05.2025 aforementioned V harassing Vanshd away all the jew Vanshdeep Singh him. He alleged th caste-related rema in the matter. Ini death of father of alongwith his pate who had intervene appellant but few aunt. It was revea children of the app who had sent voic In the said voice person named as G them to pay the sc following words “ their maternal unc 3. As pe given by Baljinde used caste-based a Bhagwan Balmik 2026 (O&M) 2 025 and thereafter, the appellan ned Vanshdeep Singh and her other anshdeep Singh and his younger sis e jewellery and cash amount kept Singh had approached the complaina eged that now the appellant had been h remarks through WhatsApp and henc r. Initially inquiry was conducted. ther of Vanshdeep Singh, he alongw is paternal aunt Raj Kaur. He had so ervened and had sent Vanshdeep Singh t few days thereafter, they had gone a revealed that on 19.02.2026, the scho the appellant had made a phone call to nt voice recorded message to Baljinde voice-recorded message, the complain ed as Gopi, Nav and also paternal aunt the school fees of her children. In the ords “you brought all the Churas. Ask al uncle. It is shameful”. As per the allegations, the above said aljinder Kaur to the Investigating Off ased abusive language about the com almiki Sangarsh Dal, therefore th pellant, who is mother of the other family members had started er sister. The appellant had taken kept in house and left the same. plainant for help and he supported been hurling abuses to him by using d hence, he prayed for taking action cted. It was revealed that after the longwith his sister had been living had sought help of the complainant p Singh and his sister to live with the gone again to live with their paternal e school teacher of Vanshdeep Singh call to her for depositing school fees, aljinder Kaur, daughter of Raj Kaur. mplainant was heard accusing some al aunts of her son Vansh and asking In the end, she was heard saying the s. Ask them to pay Rs.1,50,000/- of ve said voice recorded message was g Officer. Since the petitioner had he complainant, who is President of ore the aforementioned FIR was the arted aken ame. orted sing ction r the ng inant h the ernal ingh fees, aur. some king g the of was had nt of was AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1213-202 registered. Inves Apprehending he anticipatory bail w Sessions Judge, A 4. It is a falsely implicate Baljinder Kaur or misuse the proces been mentally hara to give her entire aware about the c her. Her custod investigation. He offences punishab not attracted again learned Additional With these broad 01.04.2026 is liab deserves to be exte 5. Powe filed which is take Learned State co vehemently argued As the allegations 2026 (O&M) 3 Investigation proceedings have been ng her arrest, the appellant moved bail which has been dismissed by the ge, Amritsar vide order dated 01.04.2 It is argued by learned counsel for th icated in this case. She has not sent a aur or any other person. The FIR has cess of law. Her children have be ly harassed after the death of her husb entire share in the property left by he t the caste of the complainant. No re custodial interrogation is not requi n. Her antecedents are clean. The nishable under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3 d against her in this case. While pas itional Sessions Judge did not take int broad submissions, it is urged tha is liable to be set aside, the appeal de xtended benefit of anticipatory bai Power of attorney on behalf of respon is taken on record. Status report has b ate counsel assisted by learned coun argued that there is no illegality or in ations in the FIR prima facie make e been initiated and are underway. oved an application for grant of by the Court of Learned Additional 1.04.2026. l for the appellant that she has been sent any voice recorded message to IR has been registered against her to ave been used against her. She has r husband. She has been pressurized by her husband. She was not at all No recovery is to be effected from required. She is ready to join The ingredients of commission of and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act are at all ile passing the impugned order, the ake into consideration all these facts. ed that the impugned order dated eal deserves to be accepted and she ry bail. respondent No.2-complaint has been t has been filed by respondent State. d counsel for the complainant has infirmity in the impugned order. make out a case for commission of way. t of ional been ge to er to e has rized at all from join n of at all he facts. ated she been tate. has rder. n of AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1213-202 offences punishab under Section 18 o application as file Sessions Judge wa stressed that ther dismissed. 6. This C for the parties at co 7. As pe after the death of h President of Bhag and the latter had had sent voice-re sister-in-law, there children, they we message itself, she voice-recorded me Court by learned that in the end of churas”. Ask them however, a quest appellant and that complainant-respo whether the record 2026 (O&M) 4 nishable under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1 n 18 of SC/ST Act is clearly attracted as filed by the appellant before the dge was not maintainable and had been t there is no merit in the appeal a This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. As per the allegations, the present app th of her husband. Her son had appro Bhagwan Balmiki Sangarsh Dal and er had intervened in the matter. Sub recorded message through What , thereby taunting them that despite h ey were not paying school fees an elf, she had used caste-related remarks ed message contained in a pendrive h arned State counsel and on hearing th of the voice-recorded message, th sk them to pay Rs.1,50,000/- of her hu question of debate as to whether d that this-caste related remark was respondent No.2. It is also a matte recorded message so sent is to be con nd 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act, as such bar tracted in this case. The anticipatory re the Court of Learned Additional d been rightly dismissed. It is, thus, peal and the same is liable to be ubmissions made by learned counsel ent appellant abandoned her children approached the complainant who is and a member of Scheduled Caste . Subsequent thereto, the appellant WhatsApp to the daughter of her spite having taken the custody of her es and in the said voice-recorded marks against the complainant. The rive has been made available to this ring that conversation, it is revealed the words “you brought all the her husband have been uttered. It is, ther this voice recording is of the was used by the appellant qua the matter of trial and evidence as to be considered to be an act of hurling h bar atory ional thus, o be unsel ldren ho is aste llant f her f her rded The this ealed the It is, f the a the as to rling AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1213-202 abuses or intentio complainant withi words so uttered w this stage, there Adhiniym, 2023 present appellant. be granted in a ca facie case for com is not made out or this regard can b Court in Dr. Su Another (2018) 6 State of Kerala an Supreme Court ha prima facie existe caused to the acc preliminary inquir fact discloses the the SC/ST Act. It the necessary ingr said to be sufficie the SC/ST Act and devoid of the esse be enough for invo 2026 (O&M) 5 ntentionally insulting or intimidating t within public view. It is also a matter tered were intended to be used as again there is no certificate under Sectio 2023 showing that the voice-recorde ellant. It is well settled proposition of in a case registered under the provisi commission of offence punishable u out or if it could be shown if the alleg can be placed upon the observation . Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. 8) 6 SS 454. Reliance can also be la and another, 2024 SCC OnLine ourt has observed that a duty is cast existence with a view to ensure that he accused. The Court should not inquiry to determine if the narration o es the essential ingredients required t ct. It was further observed that if th ry ingredients of the offence on a prim ufficient to bring into operation the b ct and holding otherwise would mean essential ingredients required for c or invoking the bar under Section 18 o dating the respondent No.2 and the matter of evidence as to whether the s against the complainant or not? At Section 63 of Bharatiya Sakshya recorded message is in fact of the tion of law that anticipatory bail can rovisions of SC/ST Act, if a prima able under the provisions of this Act e allegations were false. Reliance in vations made by Hon’ble Supreme n v. State of Maharashtra and so be placed upon Shajan Skaria v. ine SC 2249, wherein the Hon’ble s cast upon the Court to determine e that no unnecessary humiliation is d not shy away from conducting a ation of facts in the complaint/FIR in uired to constitute an offence under t if the accusation does not disclose a prima facie reading, it cannot be the bar envisaged by Section 18 of d mean that even a plain accusation, for constituting the offence, would n 18 of the said Act. the r the At shya f the l can ma s Act ce in reme nd v. n’ble mine on is ng a IR in nder close ot be 8 of tion, ould AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1213-202 8. On a facts of this Cour prima facie do punishable under the bar of Section As such pre-trial i out a case for gran aside, the appeal i anticipatory bail i surrender before t 10 days from tod subsequently, as a surety bonds to th also abide by the of BNSS. 9. It is m the purpose of dec as an expression o 04.05.2026 Amit Sharma 2026 (O&M) 6 On applying the above discussed p Court, this Court is of the considere do not disclose the ingredients under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of ection 18 of SC/ST Act cannot be sai trial incarceration of the appellant is or grant of anticipatory bail. Accordin ppeal is accepted and the prayer made bail is allowed, subject to the cond efore the Investigating Officer/Arresti m today and shall join investigation y, as and when required and subject to s to the satisfaction of the Investigatin y the usual terms and conditions as en It is made clear that the observations of deciding the present appeal and th sion of opinion on the merits of the ca (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No sed position of law to the peculiar nsidered opinion that the allegations ients for commission of offences (s) of the SC/ST Act and, therefore, be said to be operative in this case. ant is not required and she has made cordingly, the impugned order is set r made by the appellant for grant of conditions that the appellant shall Arresting Officer within a period of igation within that period and also ject to furnishing personal as well as stigating/Arresting Officer. She shall s as envisaged under Section 482(2) ations made hereinabove are only for and the same shall not be construed the case. (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No uliar tions s fore, . ade is set nt of shall d of also ell as shall 2(2) y for trued AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.