Bombay High Court
Rajendra S/O. Premchand Patil And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 August, 2017
Bench: V.K. Jadhav
cran3589.17
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3589 OF 2017
1. Rajendra s/o Premchand Patil
2. Pritesh Rajendra Patil
3. Madhuri Vinayak Chaudhari
4. Narendra Pralhad Patil ...Applicants
versus
The State of Maharashtra and another ...Respondents
...
Advocate for Applicants : Mr. A.N. Nagargoje
APP for Respondent No.1: Mr. A.S. Shinde
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. P.S. Paranjape
.....
CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.
DATED : 16th AUGUST, 2017
PER COURT:-
1. The applicants are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with
crime No. 175/2017 registered at Shirpur city police station, District
Dhule. The application of the applicants with similar prayer bearing
criminal bail application Nos. 506 and 519 of 2017 came to be rejected
by the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule on
7.7.2017.
2. Brief facts giving rise to the present application are as follows:-
a) On the basis of the complaint lodged by respondent No.2 Anita,
the aforesaid crime came to be registered against the applicants for the
cran3589.17
offences punishable under sections 498(A), 448, 420, 406, 323, 504, 34
of I.P.C. and under Section 3, 1 (R) and (S) of Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and Amendment
Act 2015 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the "Atrocities
Act"). It has been alleged in the complaint that the complainant was
residing with applicant No.1. There was live in relationship between the
complainant and applicant No.1 and they resided together for a period
of 10 to 12 years. Thereafter, on 30.12.2016, they have mutually given
legal effect to the said relationship by performing registered marriage. It
has been alleged in the complaint that applicant No.1 is not doing
anything and he is also addicted to bad vices. On the other hand, the
complainant is serving as a Nurse on monthly salary. The applicant
Nos. 2 and 3 are children of applicant No.1 born from his first wife.
Under the pretext of marriage of applicant No.3 Madhuri, applicant No.1
had taken certain amount from the complainant, however, though
assured, he did not repay the same. The applicant No.2 is taking
education at Pune and the complainant bore the educational expenses
of applicant No.2. It has been alleged in the complaint that applicant
Nos. 1 to 4 had purchased certain property and the complainant has
financed them for purchasing the said property. However, without
consent of the complainant, the applicant Nos. 1 to 4 sold the said
property and as such caused financial loss to the complainant. It has
also been alleged in the complaint that applicant No.1 used to
pressurize the complainant for various reasons and even he used to
cran3589.17
abuse her by referring her caste. The applicant No.1 also used to threat
her on various counts. On the basis of these allegations, the applicants
apprehend their arrest at the hands of police and thus preferred this
application for grant of pre-arrest bail.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that vague allegations
have been made in the complaint in such a manner that the applicants
have deceived her and also committed criminal breach of trust. The
relations between the parties are now strained and thus the complainant
has sent the complaint by post to the concerned police station.
Applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are taking education and applicant No.4 is a
Government servant. Learned counsel submits that the allegations in
respect of abusing on caste basis have been made only for the reason
to attract the provisions of Atrocities Act. Learned counsel submits that
there was live in relationship for 10 to 12 years and as stated in the
complaint and thereafter, the complainant and applicant No.1 gave legal
effect to their relationships and accordingly they got married by
registered marriage in the year 2016. There are vague allegations
about selling of property standing the name of the complainant, and that
the applicants have used the said amount of consideration for their
personal use.
4. Learned A.P.P. submits that there is strong prima facie case
against all the applicants. The complainant has made serious
cran3589.17
allegations against all the applicants. The complainant was subjected to
ill-treatment on various counts and even the applicants in furtherance of
their common intention have also deceived her and committed criminal
breach of Trust.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 original complainant
submits that the complainant was sexually, physically, economically and
mentally exploited by the applicants. Learned counsel submits that in
the given set of allegations, sub-clauses (i) and (ii) of clause (w) of
section 3 of Atrocities Act stand attracted and as such, there is bar of
Section 18. Thus, in view of bar under section 18 of the Atrocities Act,
this application seeking pre-arrest bail cannot be entertained.
6. On perusal of the complaint and the investigation papers, it
appears that there was live in relationship for 10 to 12 years and
thereafter, the complainant and applicant No.1 given legal effect to their
relationship by performing registered marriage on 30.12.2016 at
Jalgaon. It has been stated in the complaint that their relations as
husband and wife are still subsisting. On the above backdrop, it
appears that the complainant has made vague allegations in the
complaint. It also appears from the contents of the complaint that the
applicant Nos. 2 to 4 have not played any role and they have been
impleaded in the case for the reason best known to the complainant. In
view of sub-clauses (i) and (ii) of clause (w) of Section 3 of the Atrocities
cran3589.17
Act, the accused intentionally touches a women belonging to a
Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, knowing that she belongs to a
Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, when such act of touching is of
a sexual nature and is without the recipient's consent and further in
terms of sub-clause (ii) of clause (w) if accused uses words, acts or
gestures of a sexual nature towards a woman belonging to a Scheduled
Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, knowing that she belongs to Scheduled
Caste or Scheduled Tribes, the said clauses are attracted. Learned
counsel for respondent No.2 specifically referring the explanation,
submitted that expression "consent" may unequivocal voluntarily
agreement when the person by words, gestures or any form of non-
verbal communication, communicates willingness to participate in the
specific act. In the given set of allegations, even prima facie, I hardly
find that sub clauses (i) and (ii) of clause (w) attract in this case. The
complainant is wife of applicant No.1 and their relationship as husband
and wife is still subsisting. At the most, charge under section 498A
stands attracted. It thus appears that the complaint is drafted in such a
manner that penal provisions of Atrocities Act shall be attracted. Under
these circumstances, the bar as provided by Section 18 of the Atrocities
Act hardly attracts. The applicants and complainant were residing
together in live in relationship for 10 to 12 years and thereafter given
legal effect to their relationship. In the given set of allegations, in my
opinion, this is a fit case to release the applicants on pre-arrest bail.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:-
cran3589.17
ORDER
I. Criminal application is hereby allowed.
II. In the event of their arrest, in connection with crime No. 175/2017
registered with Shirpur city police station, District Dhule, the
applicants (1) Rajendra Premchand Patil, (2) Pritesh Rajendra
Patil (3) Madhuri Vinayak Chaudhari and (4) Narendra Pralhad
Patil, be released on bail, on furnishing personal bond of
Rs.15,000/- each, with one surety of the like amount by each of
them, on the following conditions:-
a) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence, in any manner and they shall make themselves
available as and when required by the investigating officer.
III. Criminal application is disposed of.
( V. K. JADHAV, J.)
rlj/
