SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS ABA No. 1134 of 2024 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned A.G.A. and Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel for the complainant. 4. Present applicants Vijender Singh and Shubham Chaudhary, are praying for anticipatory bail in reference to FIR dated 28.10.2024, bearing FIR No. 0674 of 2024, registered at Police Station Kotwali Roorkee District Haridwar, wherein the applicants have been implicated for the offences punishable under sections 121, 132, 324(4), 351(3), 352 of BNS, 2023 read with Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 5. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that as per the contents of the FIR, no offence is made out and the implication is nothing but appears to be a false implication, however, still there is an apprehension of arrest. 6. Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel for the complainant raised a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the instant anticipatory bail application in terms of Section 482 of BNS 2023, and submits that the anticipatory bail application is not maintainable, since, the applicants have also been implicated for the offences which are punishable under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Shajan Skaria vs. State of Kerala and another 2024 INSC 625 i.e Criminal Appeal No. 2622 of 2024 decided on 23.08.2024 particularly by placing reliance to three paragraphs of this judgment paragraph nos. 47, 48 and 49. He submits that in view of the aforesaid judgment if no prima facie material exists warranting arrest in a complaint or the FIR and no offence is made out, then in such eventuality, the anticipatory bail application can be entertained. 6. Apart from this, Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia also pointed out that the charge sheet has already been filed on 11.03.2025 and the summons were issued on 16.04.2025 but the applicants are avoiding to receive the summons and adopting a delaying tactics. 7. On such a statement, the Registry was asked to get the report as to when the summons were served? It has been apprised that the summons were served upon the applicants on 09.02.2026 and the next date before the trial court is fixed on 06.03.2026. 8. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that both the applicants shall put their appearance before the trial court on 06.03.2026, however, since the applicants approached to this Court seeking anticipatory bail before filing of the charge sheet, therefore, the applicants may be granted interim protection. 9. In reference to the judgment, as relied upon Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the applicants argued that even from the contents of the FIR the offence under Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are not made out since the occurrence took place in the chamber of respondent/complainant who is serving as a Junior Engineer and the chamber cannot be treated as a public place within the public view. 10. Be that as it may, all these aspects are the subject matter of the trial but prima facie this Court is of the view that the chamber of the respondent/complainant cannot be treated to be a public place within the public view, however, prima facie view of this court is only a tentative one and that will have no impact on the merit of the case. 11. In such view of the matter and in view of the judgment of the Apex Court which is relied upon by Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia and after having gone through the FIR, this Court is of the view that both the applicants deserve for anticipatory bail. 12. Having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, as an interim measure, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail subject to furnishing of their personal bond with two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court Concerned. 13. Since before the trial court the next date is fixed on 06.03.2026, on that day, as per the undertaking, as given on behalf of the applicants, they will ensure their presence before the trial court and if the applicants ensure their presence before the trial court on the date fixed then the trial court will release them on interim bail subject to the satisfaction of furnishing. 14. It is made clear that the trial court shall make all possible efforts to expedite the trial without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties without being influenced with the observation as above. 15. Subject to the observations and directions as above, instant anticipatory bail application is disposed of. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 11.02.2026 Nahid