Kesarinath Dongarinath Mhatre vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 3110 Bom

                                                                                      2. cri apeal 494-17.doc


RMA      
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 494 OF 2017


            Kesarinath Dongarinath Mhatre                                        .. Appellant

                                 Versus
            The State of Maharashtra                                             .. Respondent

                                                    ...................
            Appearances
            Mr. Rajiv Patil, Sr. Advocate
            i/by Mr. Prashant M. Patil                   Advocate for the Appellant
            Mr. H.J. Dedia                               APP for the State
                                                    ...................



                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                              SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

DATE : JUNE 13, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :

1. Heard both sides.

2. This appeal is preferred by the appellant against the

order dated 29.5.2017 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions

Judge-2, Thane in Anticipatory Bail Application No.

1024/2017 preferred by the appellant. By the said order, the

anticipatory bail application preferred by the appellant in

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 2

2. cri apeal 494-17.doc

C.R. No. I-422/2016 of Kashimira Police Station came to be

rejected. The said C.R. is under various sections of IPC and

under Section 3(1)(x) of the Schedule Castes and Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

3. The FIR clearly shows that the appellant abused the

first informant in relation to her caste in a place within public

view. The insult was with intent to humiliate her. In this

view of the matter, the bar under Section 18 of the S.C. &

S.T. Act would apply, hence, it is not possible to grant

anticipatory bail to the appellant.

4. In view of above, the appeal is dismissed.

5. The appellant has been granted interim protection in

relation to arrest by order dated 19.4.2017 till 29.5.2017 by

the trial Court. The said protection is extended for a period

of four weeks from today.

[ SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J. ]              [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]



jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                         2 of 2