Anticipatory bail is generally barred in cases under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), by virtue of Section 18 of the Act.
However, the Supreme Court has carved out a crucial exception: anticipatory bail can be granted by the High Court if the court finds that no prima facie offence under the Act is made out from a plain reading of the First Information Report (FIR) or complaint.
Section 18 of the SC/ST Act Bars anticipatory Bail
The Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, categorically excludes the application of Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) (Section 482 of BNSS), which allows anticipatory bail.
The Parliament has inserted this bar to protect victims from intimidation and to ensure effective prosecution.
This bar was put in place by Parliament to protect victims from intimidation and coercion and to ensure effective prosecution against caste-related crimes, considered to be a special class of offences stemmed from historical discrimination.
Constitutional Validity of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act
In State of M.P. v. Ram Krishna Balothia [1995 AIR 1198], the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act, which prohibits anticipatory bail in specific cases.
In Vilas Pandurang Pawar v. State of Maharashtra [AIR 2012 SC 3316], the Supreme Court further clarified the application of Section 18 of the SC /ST Act.
The Bar is Not Absolute
The Supreme Court, in cases like Prathvi Raj Chauhan vs. Union of India (2020) and the later judgment in Kiran vs. Rajkumar Jivraj Jain [2025 INSC 1067] clarified that this bar is not absolute.
Courts must first determine if the allegations, on their face, constitute the ingredients of an offence under the SC/ST Act.
No Mini Trial When Considering Bail application
The Bail Courts are not allowed to conduct a detailed evaluation of evidence or a “mini-trial” at the anticipatory bail stage. They can only assess whether a prima facie case is made out from the first impression of the averments in the FIR itself.
If a prima facie case under the SC/ST Act is not made out, then an application for anticipatory bail may be maintainable, but only before the High Court (under its original jurisdiction) and not before a Special Court designated under the Act.
No Anticipatory Bail When FIR Discloses the Offence
If the complaint or FIR clearly discloses the essential elements of an offence under the Act (e.g., using caste slurs in public view, caste-based assault, or electoral retaliation), anticipatory bail is not an option for the accused. In such scenarios, regular bail can only be sought after arrest.
Grant Bail if No Prima Facie Case is Made Out
In Shajan Skaria v. The State of Kerala & Anr [2024 INSC 625], the Supreme Court elaborated the law in respect of grant of anticipatory bail, then highlighted and recognised the bar created under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act to observe that only in the cases where the offence could not be said to have been made out on a very prima facie consideration, the court may exercise the discretion to grant pre-arrest bail to the accused.
Conclusion
In summary, the ability to get anticipatory bail in an SC/ST case depends entirely on whether the allegations in the initial complaint are deemed by a High Court to prima facie establish an offence under the specific provisions of the Act.
