Karnataka High Court
Criminal LawCriminal Procedure and Evidence

The SC/ST Act’s anticipatory-bail bar does not apply absent a prima facie offence.

HARUN SHEKH S/O. KHAJA HUSEN, vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: September 25, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
The SC/ST Act’s anticipatory-bail bar does not apply absent a prima facie offence.. HARUN SHEKH S/O. KHAJA HUSEN, vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

On 4 December 2025, a dispute allegedly arose near Patel Nagar Road between the complainant and his mother, and the appellant, who operated a lassi shop. The complaint alleged that the appellant abused them by referring to their caste and assaulted them.

Source reference: pp. 3–4, paras. 5–6

The case was initially registered against two accused; following investigation, proceedings against the second accused were dropped and the charge-sheet was filed against the appellant alone.

Source reference: p. 4, para. 7

The Sessions Court rejected the appellant’s application for anticipatory bail, and he appealed under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Source reference: pp. 2, 4, paras. 1, 8
02

Issues

Whether the material disclosed a prima facie case under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, thereby attracting the bar on anticipatory bail under Sections 18 and 18A.

Source reference: pp. 6–7, paras. 13, 15–17

Whether the appellant had made out sufficient grounds for setting aside the Sessions Court’s order and obtaining anticipatory bail.

Source reference: p. 6, para. 13
03

Law Applied

Sections 18 and 18A of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act bar anticipatory bail where the complaint and material disclose a prima facie offence under that Act; the bar does not operate where a prima facie case is not made out.

Source reference: pp. 4–5, paras. 9–10; p. 7, para. 16

The Court relied on Prathviraj Chouhan v. Union of India, (2020) 4 SCC 727, for this principle.

Source reference: p. 5, para. 10

The alleged offences included Section 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

Source reference: pp. 2, 4, paras. 1, 9
04

Reasoning

The Court considered the complaint and investigation material only to determine whether a prima facie case under the SC/ST Act attracted the statutory bar.

Source reference: p. 6, para. 15

It concluded that the necessary ingredients of the Act’s offences were not prima facie established on the material before it; accordingly, Sections 18 and 18A did not preclude anticipatory bail.

Source reference: p. 7, para. 17

The Court also noted that the investigation was complete and the charge-sheet had been filed, making custodial interrogation unnecessary at that stage.

Source reference: pp. 7–8, para. 18

Considering these circumstances and Prathviraj Chouhan, it found grounds to grant bail subject to conditions.

Source reference: p. 8, para. 19
05

Holding

The Court answered the issue in the affirmative, allowed the appeal, and set aside the Sessions Court’s order rejecting anticipatory bail.

It directed that, in the event of arrest, the appellant be released on anticipatory bail on conditions including execution of a ₹1,00,000 personal bond with two sureties, surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days, cooperation with the investigation, and compliance with the other stated conditions.

Source reference: pp. 9–11, Order
06

Acts & Sections Cited

3 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20231

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 19892

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

HARUN SHEKH S/O. KHAJA HUSEN,vsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Karnataka High Court · September 25, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment