GS 2 – Polity
Context
On September 1, 2025, the Supreme Court of India cancelled an anticipatory bail granted by the Bombay High Court to an accused in a caste-based crime case.
The Court reaffirmed Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which bars anticipatory bail for caste-related offences made out prima facie.
The judgment strengthens legal protections for Dalit and tribal communities against caste-based violence, intimidation, and electoral retaliation.
Facts of the Case
- Incident Date: November 26, 2024
- Complainant: Kiran, a member of the Scheduled Caste community.
- Accused: Rajkumar Jain and others.
Allegations:
- Kiran and his family were attacked after he refused to cast a vote as directed during Assembly elections.
- Accusations include:
- Assault with iron rods.
- Use of caste-based slurs.
- Molestation of his mother and aunt.
- Threats to burn their house with petrol bottles.
- Electoral coercion and retaliation.
- The attack was witnessed by independent eyewitnesses, strengthening the prosecution’s case.
High Court’s Decision:
- Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail, questioning the credibility of the allegations and suggesting political motives and exaggeration.
Supreme Court Ruling
- Bench Led By: Chief Justice D. B. R. Gavai.
- The SC held that Section 18 of the SC/ST Act:
- Bars anticipatory bail for caste crimes once a prima facie case is established.
- Protects victims from pre-trial intimidation and retaliation.
- The SC found the High Court’s order to be:
- A “manifest error” and “jurisdictional illegality.”
- Improper for conducting a mini-trial at the anticipatory bail stage.
Key Observations
- Caste-based insults in public view:
- The attack occurred in public view, meeting the statutory requirement of Section 3(1)(r).
- Electoral retaliation:
- The violence was linked to voting choice, attracting Section 3(1)(v) (coercion related to voting).
- Evidence Strength:
- Eyewitness accounts, recovery of weapons, and medical evidence made the FIR credible.
- Warning to Courts:
- High Courts must not overstep by weighing evidence prematurely.
- Anticipatory bail is only to be considered if no prima facie case exists.
Why This Judgment Matters
- Reaffirms constitutional validity of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act.
- Prevents misuse of anticipatory bail to escape accountability in caste crimes.
- Upholds dignity and security of vulnerable communities.
- Recognizes that caste-based electoral violence has broader implications for democratic participation and social justice.