Employee’s Suicide After Alleged Caste Harassment: Karnataka HC Grants Anticipatory Bail To Superior Officer After Chargesheet Filed

The complainant, the deceased’s wife, alleged that the deceased, a Scheduled Caste employee of SKDRDP, was harassed by the appellant, his superior, including through caste-based abuse and criticism of his work and leave. She alleged that the harassment contributed to her husband’s suicide.

The FIR registered offences under Sections 108 and 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).

The Sessions Court rejected the appellant’s application for anticipatory bail, leading to this appeal under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act.

Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act provides for an appeal against an order refusing bail. Sections 18 and 18A of the Act restrict anticipatory bail in cases involving offences under the Act.

As the appellant argued, Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India recognizes that the bar does not apply where the complaint fails to disclose a prima facie case under the Act.

The Sessions Court’s reliance on Shajan Skaria v. State of Kerala was noted.

The alleged offences were under Sections 108 and 352 read with Section 3(5) BNS, and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

The Court considered the allegations of caste-based abuse and harassment, as well as the parties’ competing submissions on the statutory bar.

It noted that the deceased and appellant did not work in the same office premises and that SKDRDP was described as an organisation functioning on the basis of a public trust rather than a Government office.

Taking account of the nature of the allegations, the material on record, completion of the investigation and filing of the charge sheet, and the appellant’s undertaking to cooperate if required, the Court found that anticipatory bail was warranted subject to stringent conditions.

It directed the appellant to appear before the jurisdictional Court within 15 days of receiving a certified copy of the order and execute a personal bond of ₹2,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum.

The relief was subject to conditions, including non-interference with witnesses, cooperation with the investigation, restrictions on leaving the Trial Court’s jurisdiction without permission, and attendance at hearings unless exempted.