Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected anticipatory bail for Mukesh Kumawat and Mohit Jat, who allegedly assaulted a Scheduled Caste teacher and called her a “chindi chor” in a news report. The Court noted prima facie intent to humiliate and upheld strict SC/ST Act provisions.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently rejected the anticipatory bail plea of two journalists accused of assaulting a woman teacher and calling her a “chindi chor” (petty thief) in a news report.
Justice Gajendra Singh, while delivering the order, observed that
“the intention of humiliation or insult was prima facie present in the case involving the woman teacher belonging to Scheduled Caste (SC) category.”
The Court further noted,
“The intention can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances and appellants claim that they are journalists (though police station Sardarpur, Dhar has reported that they are not recognized in M.P) and they publish news in Dainik Sach Media newspaper published from Jodhpur dated 26.03.2025. The news article was published with the reference of appellant Mahesh Kumawat in which respondent No.2 was described as ‘Chindi Chor.’ The word ‘Chindi Chor’ if translated means ‘petty thief’ or ‘myserly thief.’ Accordingly, the intention of humiliation or insult of respondent No.2 is inferred and the contents of the First Information Report are not such that the test of prima facie case is not satisfied.”
The incident dates back to March, when Mukesh Kumawat and Mohit Jat allegedly confronted the teacher during an examination. They reportedly questioned her for classifying a student as “private” due to shortage of attendance.
The accused, who introduced themselves as journalists, were reportedly stopped from filming the exam. Later, while the teacher was on her way home, the accused allegedly assaulted her and also used casteist slurs, along with blackmailing her.
The accused, however, argued before the Court that a false case was registered against them. They claimed they had gone to the school to cover a story about illegal collection of money from students.
The State counsel opposed their anticipatory bail plea, stating that Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act bars grant of anticipatory bail in such cases.
The State argued that
“a prima facie case was made out against the accused.”
It was also highlighted that Jat’s complaint against the teacher was investigated, and no wrongdoing was found on her part.
After considering the arguments and records, the Court concluded that a prima facie case existed against the accused and therefore dismissed their appeals for anticipatory bail.
The Court clarified,
“Appellants do not belong to SC or ST category. Respondent No.2 has filed the complaint disclosing her caste that falls within the Scheduled Caste category and the caste of appellants that certainly does not fall within the purview of SC or ST category.”
Advocate Mayank Mishra appeared for the accused, while Government Advocate Rajendra Singh Suryavanshi represented the State of Madhya Pradesh.
This case highlights the strict legal provisions under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and emphasizes the judiciary’s stance on safeguarding dignity and preventing caste-based harassment.
Case Title:
Mukesh Kumawat v State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Karur Stampede Case
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
