Cr.Misc. M26841 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M26841 of 2011 Date of decision:- 5.12.2011 Bachan Singh and others Petitioner vs. State of Haryana and another Respondent Present: Mr. Rajneesh Chadwal, Advocate. Ms. Shalini Attri, DAG, Hry Mr. Mukesh Yadav, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioners have already appeared before the trial court pursuant to the interim order dated 5.9.2011. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the petition for pre-arrest bail on the ground that there is a legal bar u/s 18 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act ( for short ' the Act'). I have considered the objective in context to the complaint filed by respondent No.2 Dalip Singh against the petitioners and others. The complainant and the petitioners, as per contents of the complaint seem to be old rivals as prior to the lodging of the complaint, proceedings u/s 107/151 Cr.P.C. were initiated against the complainant. The petitioners also seem to have filed a civil suit against the complainant. The complainant has levelled allegations that the petitioners have raised construction adjacent to the house of the complainant and have thrown water on the katcha brick wall, due to which the brick wall of the complainant had fallen and that the complainant had asked the accused Cr.Misc. M26841 of 2011 2 persons regarding the falling of the brick wall and the complainant was allegedly abused in the name of his caste. After considering the averments in the complaint, it is apparent that there is an old enmity between the parties. They have been litigating with each other with effect from the year 2001, as is apparent from para 7 of the complaint. It will be debatable during trial whether the provisions of Section 3 of the Act are true or it is a case of user of the provisions of Section 3 of the said Act on account of long standing enmity and rivalry. Without expression of any opinion on merits of the case, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have already put in appearance before the summoning court, the petition can be allowed. The petition is allowed and the petitioners will appear before the trial court on the next date of hearing and furnish bail bonds for a sum of Rs.5000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court . In case of their doing so, they will be released on bail subject to the condition that they will continue to appear before the trial court and will not absent themselves without any sufficient cause. Nothing mentioned in the order will prejudice the right of the complainant, in any manner. December 5 ,2011 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE Cr.Misc. M26841 of 2011 3 Cr.Misc. M26841 of 2011 4 December 5 ,2011 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE