CRM No. M-8511 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-8511 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.05.2011 Ashok Kumar and others ....Petitioners Versus Hari Chand and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. Sunil Panwar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. M.S. Chahal, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) This is an application seeking anticipatory bail in criminal complaint No.20 instituted on 5.4.2010 under Sections 323/447/448/452/506 IPC and Section 3 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), wherein petitioners have been summoned for offences punishable under Section 323 IPC and Section 3 of the Act, vide order dated 4.10.2010 of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that petitioners are Scheduled Castes, hence, no offence punishable under Section 3 of the Act is made out against the petitioners. Learned counsel further states that other offence punishable under Section 323 of the IPC is bailable. He has further argued that if prima facie case under the provisions of CRM No. M-8511 of 2011 (O&M) -2- the Act is not made out, then Section 18 of the Act will not come into way of the petitioners in getting bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that petitioners have appeared before the trial Court in compliance of order dated 21.3.2011 and have already been enlarged on bail by the trial Court. He further states that petitioners shall keep on appearing before the trial Court on each and every date fixed. Mr. M.S. Chahal, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 states that alleged caste certificates filed by the petitioners have not been issued by the competent authority. He has further stated that petitioner may be of Scheduled Caste in the State of UP, however, they are not Scheduled Caste in the State of Haryana, therefore, offence under the provisions of the SC/ST Act is made out against the petitioners. In the opinion of this Court, at the time of deciding the anticipatory bail application, no finding can be recorded by this Court as to whether petitioners are SC/ST within the State of Haryana. This finding has to be recorded by the trial Court as to whether petitioners are SC/ST with the State of Haryana. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, petition is allowed. Order dated 21.3.2011 is made absolute. (Alok Singh) Judge May 16, 2011 R.S.