No Prima Facie Evidence of Caste-Based Offense: SC/ST Act's Bar on Bail Not Applicable: Bombay High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Activist

Bombay High Court in Waman Barku Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. granted anticipatory bail to Waman Barku Mhatre, a social activist accused of outraging the modesty of a female journalist and using caste-based insults under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act). The court ruled that the accusations lacked sufficient evidence to constitute an offense under the SC/ST Act, thus allowing bail despite the usual bar under Section 18 of the Act.

The complainant, a journalist from the Scheduled Caste community, accused Mhatre of intercepting her on August 20, 2024, and making derogatory remarks while she was reporting on protests in Badlapur. Mhatre was charged under Sections 74 and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. His initial application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the Special Judge, Kalyan.

Mhatre contended that his remarks were made out of frustration with the journalist’s reporting and had no connection to her caste. He claimed he was unaware of her caste, arguing that this negated the elements required for an SC/ST Act offense.

No Evidence of Caste-Based Insult: The court found no prima facie evidence to suggest that Mhatre knew the complainant's caste, which is essential to establish an offense under Section 3(1)(w)(ii) of the SC/ST Act. The court noted that the remarks appeared to stem from dissatisfaction with the journalist's reporting, not her caste identity​.

Lack of Caste-Based Intention: The FIR focused on Mhatre’s frustration with the complainant’s professional activities rather than any intent to humiliate her based on caste. The court observed that this undermined the allegations of a caste-based insult, which is a key requirement under Section 3(2)(va)​.

Cooperation with Investigation: The court noted that Mhatre had cooperated with the investigation, attended hearings, and no evidence indicated that he had threatened the complainant or witnesses. This contributed to the court's decision to make the interim bail protection permanent​.

The High Court set aside the Special Judge’s order and granted anticipatory bail to Mhatre. The court emphasized that its observations were preliminary and would not influence the trial proceedings.

This ruling underscores that anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act can be granted when there is no prima facie evidence of caste-based insult, ensuring that individuals are not subjected to unjust pre-trial detention under the Act’s stringent provisions.

Date of Decision: October 7, 2024

Waman Barku Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.​.