Anticipatory Bail maintainability: Absence of specific caste-based insults precludes prima facie bar under SC/ST Act.

The appellant, a Sarpanch, was accused of misbehaving with the informant, catching her hand, and hitting her with slaps and fists

The prosecution alleged that when the informant's husband intervened, the appellant abused and threatened him

Consequently, a case was registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 76, 352, and 351(3) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and various sections of the SC/ST Act

The appellant moved for anticipatory bail, which was refused by the Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sheikhpura, on 03.02.2026

The appellant contended that the case was a retaliatory filing because the informant refused to participate in a settlement regarding a prior dispute involving grazing goats

1. Whether the allegations in the FIR and the materials on record establish a prima facie case under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, to bar the grant of anticipatory bail

2. Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)

The court primarily applied Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act regarding appeals against bail orders

It also applied Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the grant of bail to persons apprehending arrest

The legal principle relied upon was the requirement of a prima facie case under the SC/ST Act; in the absence of specific insults directed at the victim's caste identity, the special provisions of the Act are not attracted

The Court examined the nature of the allegations and the background of the dispute. It noted that the appellant, acting as a Sarpanch, had been involved in a prior settlement dispute with the informant

Crucially, the Court observed that no specific caste-based insults were used to humiliate the informant or her husband, as conceded by the Special PP

The Court found a "distinct lack of material" to make out a prima facie case under the SC/ST Act

Regarding the BNS offenses, the Court characterized the allegations as involving "simple hurt" and, given the history of the informant filing similar false cases against other villagers, found the appellant's claim of false implication plausible

The High Court set aside the impugned order dated 03.02.2026 and allowed the appeal; the appellant was granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and the condition of attending all court dates