RAJESH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Atrocities Act') to challenge the order of rejection of pre-arrest
bail application i.e. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.300 of 2020 filed by
the present appellant before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Majalgaon
which came to be rejected on 11-09-2020. The appellant is apprehending his
arrest in connection with Crime No.191 of 2020 dated 25-08-2019 registered with
Wadwani Police Station, Dist. Beed for the offences punishable under Sections
143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 427, 452, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(2)(va) of the Atrocities Act.
(2.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. A. V. Lavte holding for Mr. S. J. Salunke for appellant, learned APP Mr. S. W. Munde for respondent No.1 - State and
learned Advocate Mr. Akshay Kulkarni (appointed) for respondent No.2.
(3.) It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the appellant that perusal of the FIR would show that the place of offence where the utterances of
abuses in the name of caste were inside the house that too by accused No.1,
therefore, prima facie offence under Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Atrocities
Act are not attracted towards the present appellant, who is original accused No.7.
Further, as regards the offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the Atrocities Act is
concerned, the FIR shows that there was no quantified damage. The allegation is
that the articles in the house of the accused persons were scattered and the
Mangalsutra of the wife of the informant and his sister-in-law is missing
somewhere. It cannot be attributed to the present appellant and, therefore, prima
facie case is not made out under that Section also. The learned Special judge
failed to consider these aspects and wrongly held that there is bar under Section
18 of the Atrocities Act. As regards the offences under Indian Penal Code are concerned, the physical custody of the appellant is not required. The learned
Advocate for the appellant, therefore, prayed for allowing the appeal and release
of the appellant on anticipatory bail.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.