Mr. Deepak Maheshwari, J.This appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellant Foosa Ram challenging the order dated 26th March, 2015 passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bikaner in Criminal Misc. Case No. 44/2015 whereby, the application filed by the accused-petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was rejected.

2. Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant as also learned Public Prosecutor.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that only the allegation against the appellant is regarding false identification of the executants of the agreement to sale which was executed between Balla Ram and Jagseer. Learned counsel has further submitted that there is no allegation against the appellant relating to the offence punishable under the Prevention of Atrocities to SC/ST Act. Learned lower Court has rejected the application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. mainly on the ground that in view of Section 18 of the said Act, the anticipatory bail application is not maintainable but as per the prosecution story, no role has been assigned against the appellant to insult the complainant on account of they being member of Scheduled Castes/Tribes. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer saying that one more case is still pending against the present appellant which was also a ground for rejection of his anticipatory bail application but the learned Public Prosecutor has also agreed to the fact that the allegation regarding the offence punishable under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are related to the accused Balla Ram, Jagseer and Dal Singh only.

4. In view of the rival contentions advanced by both the sides, it comes out that as per the facts mentioned in the complaint, only accused Balla Ram, Jagseer and Dal Singh have allegedly trespassed into the fields purchased by Kali Devi and insulted her by rebuking and tearing off her clothes on account of she being a member of Scheduled Tribe. The allegation against the present appellant is only with regard to the false identification of the parties connected to the agreement to sale.

5. In view of the above, in my considered opinion, the bar of Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is not applicable so far as the case of the present appellant is concerned. Taking all the facts and circumstances into consideration, the appeal deserves to be allowed, while setting aside the impugned order dated 26th March, 2015.

6. Accordingly, it is ordered that if the accused-appellant Foosa Ram S/o Balu Ram furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer then, in case of his arrest in connection with FIR No. 54/2014, Police Station Dantore, District Nagaur, he may immediately be released on bail along with the following stipulations:-

(i) that the appellant shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;

(ii) that the appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any Police Officer; and

(iii) that the appellant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.