Satish Kumar v. State of Punjab
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana
CRM-M 26088/2020
Before Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill
Decided on December 22, 2020

Relevancy of the case: Anticipatory bail application for an offence under Section 66D among other provisions of IPC and SC/ST Act

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66D)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 142, 323, 341, 506)
• The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Section 3)
• The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 438, 482)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• There was some monetary dispute between the complainant and the petitioner.
• The complainant took advances from the farmers but failed to keep his promises. The petitioner’s role, in this case, was that he asked the complainant to return his money.
• A video was recorded wherein the petitioner allegedly uttered certain derogatory caste-related words.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the matter between the parties was already settled when the FIR was filed. There was no utterance of caste-related words by the petitioner in the video.
• The respondent’s counsel submitted there was no utterance of caste-related words in the video but they came subsequently.

Opinion of the Bench

• The petitioner has joined the investigation. The other three accused have already been granted interim bail, so this can be considered.

Final Decision

• Petition allowed.
• Interim bail granted.

This case summary has been prepared by Nandini Gadgil, an undergraduate student at DES Shri Navalmal Firodia Law College, Pune, during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in January/February 2021.