SC/ST Act: Karnataka HC denies relief to police constable accused of refusing to marry Dalit woman citing her caste

The Karnataka High Court recently denied the anticipatory bail to a police constable accused of refusing to accept as his wife a woman with whom he had repeated physical interactions after a symbolic marriage, on account of her belonging to a Scheduled Caste [Bagvantha Ray Basavantha Ray Biradar v. State of Karnataka]..The accused constable allegedly 'married' the complainant in front of a Lord Sai Baba photo, had repeated physical relations with her, and later refused to accept her as his wife because of her caste. He was booked in a criminal case under Sections 352 (insult to provoke breach of peace), 115 (hurt), 74 (outraging modesty of a woman) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), as well as under provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).On November 3, the High Court Bench of Justice S Rachaiah observed that the restriction on granting anticipatory bail to those accused of SC/ST Act offences would apply in this case. Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the constable's plea for anticipatory bail. "As the averments of the complaint would indicate that he refused to accept her as his wife on account of that she belongs to schedule caste. The ingredients of the offence gets attracted. Therefore, he is not entitled for anticipatory bail as there is a bar under Section 18A of the said Act," the Court said. .According to the complainant, who is also a police constable, the accused had secretly married her at her residence and maintained a relationship by assuring her that he would announce the marriage later.She alleged that he later refused to accept her as his wife because she belongs to a Scheduled Caste. The complainant added that the accused even assaulted her when she questioned him, prompting her to file the criminal complaint case.The accused constable, Bhagwantraya Basantaraya Biradar, first approached the Tumakuru Sessions Court for relief. After the trial court dismissed the plea, he filed an appeal before the High Court seeking anticipatory bail.His counsel argued that the accused constable had been falsely implicated and that there was no evidence to show he had married the complainant or committed any offence. He submitted that the two colleagues had differences after the complainant proposed marriage, and that the criminal case was filed in retaliation after the accused rejected the complainant's marriage proposal.The Court, however, found that offences under the SC/ST Act were prima facie made out in this case. Accordingly, it rejected the police officer's anticipatory bail plea. .Advocate Dayanand Hiremath appeared for the accused constable (appellant).Advocate Waheeda MM appeared on behalf of the State..[Read Order].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.