Kochi Bank Manager Secures Anticipatory Bail in SC/ST Act Case
A 30-year-old bank manager in Kochi, who was booked under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has been granted anticipatory bail by a special court. The decision came after the court determined there was a lack of prima facie evidence to support the allegations against her.
Background of the Case
The accused, who served as the manager of a nationalized bank in Ernakulam, faced legal action after a temporary staff member working under her filed a complaint. The complainant alleged that the manager publicly called her by her caste name, leading to the invocation of the SC/ST Act.
In response, the bank manager moved the special court designated for trying cases under the SC/ST (POA) Act. She argued that the complaint was filed in retaliation, following allegations of financial misconduct against the complainant. An internal inquiry conducted by the bank confirmed that these allegations of financial impropriety were prima facie true, resulting in the complainant's transfer.
Court Proceedings and Evidence
During the bail hearing, the manager's legal counsel presented CCTV footage from the bank premises to the court. They asserted that a thorough review of the footage revealed no incident of humiliation or abuse as claimed by the prosecution.
The bail plea highlighted that both the bank and its staff had fully cooperated with the police investigation, providing access to all relevant evidence, including the CCTV recordings. This cooperation was emphasized as a key factor in the court's assessment.
Court's Observations and Bail Order
In its order dated January 20, the court noted that the prosecution itself admitted the available evidence did not support their version of events. Specifically, the CCTV footage and statements collected so far failed to corroborate the allegations of caste-based abuse.
The court observed, "Considering the nature of allegations, materials available on record and submission of the prosecution regarding lack of supporting evidence at present, the court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail."
This ruling underscores the importance of concrete evidence in such sensitive cases, ensuring that legal proceedings are grounded in factual substantiation rather than mere allegations.
