Himachal Pradesh High Court Declines Anticipatory Bail To Woman Accused Of Confining, Beating Scheduled Caste Boy For Touching Her House

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has denied anticipatory bail to a woman who was accused of confining and beating the deceased child because he belonged to a schedule caste and had touched her house. She also allegedly demanded a sacrificial goat for purification of her house.The Court noted that such conduct of the accused was clearly motivated by caste-based discrimination.Justice Rakesh Kainthla remarked that: “A prima facie reading of the status report and F.I.R. shows that the accused had given beatings to the deceased (a member of the scheduled caste) because the deceased happened to touch the house of the accused, and she wanted a sacrificial goat for purification. Hence, the offence was committed because of the caste of the deceased.”The petitioner, Pushpa Devi filed a petition seeking pre-arrest bail for offences under sections 107 (abetment of an offence), 127(2) (abetment of suicide), and 115(2) (punishment for abetment where the offence is not committed) read with Section 3(5) (liability of abettor) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Further allegations were also made under sections 3(2)(v) (committing an offence punishable under any law on the ground that the victim belongs to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe) and 3(2)(va) (committing any offence under the Indian Penal Code or other law against a person on the ground of their caste or tribe) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.As alleged by the police, the accused confined the deceased who belonged to schedule caste inside her cowshed and stated that she would not release him until the goat was given to her.The Court observed that the accused beat the deceased because he had touched her house and she thereafter demanded a goat for purification of her house. She along with 2-3 women had beaten him and confined him to the cowshed. The Court remarked that both accused and the deceased were of the same village and according to section 8(c) of the SC & ST Act, it is presumed that the accused knew the caste of accused. Thus, the Court concluded that the petition is not maintianable for pre-arrest bail under section 18 of the SC & ST Act. Case Name: Pushpa Devi v/s State of Himachal Pradesh Case No.: Cr.M.P.(M) No. 2385 of 2025Date of Decision: 14.10.2025For the petitioner: Mr.Naresh. K.Sood, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Aman Sood, AdvocateFor the Respondent/State: Mr.Jitender K. Sharma, Additional Advocate GeneralFor the complainant: Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Senior Advocate, with Mr. R.R. Rahi, AdvocateClick Here To Read/Download Order

Himachal Pradesh High Court Declines Anticipatory Bail To Woman Accused Of Confining, Beating Scheduled Caste Boy For Touching Her House

Mehak Aggarwal

Tags