Anticipatory Bail Can't Be Denied U/S 18 Of SC/ST Act When FIR Doesn't Mention Offence Was Due To Victim's SC Status: HP High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court, in a significant ruling by Justice Virender Singh, stated that anticipatory bail cannot be denied under Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act if the First Information Report (FIR) does not explicitly mention that the alleged offense was committed due to the victim's Scheduled Caste status. The case involved an applicant accused of rape, where Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act was added based on a supplementary statement, not the initial FIR. The High Court emphasized that only the allegations contained in the FIR should be considered when deciding on anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the Court ruled that a supplementary statement recorded during an investigation cannot be solely relied upon to deny anticipatory bail, especially when the FIR lacks the necessary ingredients for an offense under the SC/ST Act. Consequently, bail was granted to the applicant, asserting that denying it would amount to pre-trial punishment, thereby emphasizing the paramountcy of the initial complaint's content.