UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Genesis of Dispute is Civil Dispute Relating to Sale of Property – Delhi High Court Grants Bail in Alleged Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has granted bail to Priyanka Arora and Kapil Dev Arora in the case involving alleged offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 506/509/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The court scrutinized the invocation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in a dispute primarily arising out of a property sale agreement.

The appellants were accused of harassing and threatening the complainant, Ms. ‘C’, including an attempt to hit her with a car. An earlier complaint by Ms. ‘C’ had led to the registration of FIR No. 460/2022 under various sections of the IPC and the SC/ST Act. The current case was registered following an incident on October 25, 2023, and subsequent registration of FIR No. 489/2023.

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta noted the primary issue stemmed from a civil dispute over property sale. The court observed that the allegations in the FIR had inconsistencies and the CCTV footage did not conclusively support the prosecution’s claims. The judge remarked, “Appellants could not have contemplated that the complainant would also be passing the street while approaching from opposite direction.” The reliance on the CCTV footage was deemed insufficient to deny bail.

The judgment underscored the misuse of stringent laws like the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in civil disputes. It highlighted the importance of analyzing the genesis of a dispute before invoking such special laws.

The High Court set aside the order of the learned ASJ that declined bail to the appellants. It granted them bail, subject to certain conditions, emphasizing that the appellants are not required for custodial investigation and noting the civil nature of the genesis of the dispute.

Date of Decision: 12th February 2024

PRIYANKA ARORA VS STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

 

Latest Legal News