Vishnu Krishna Jadhav vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 3197 Bom

 jdk                                                      1                                            12.cr.apeal.312.17.doc




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 312 OF 2017


Vishnu Krishna Jadhav                                                            ]
Age 48 years, Occ: Retired Ex-Army                                               ]
Resident of in front of Kissan Veer                                              ]
College, Tal. Wai, Dist. Satara                                                  ].. Appellant

                    Vs.

The State of Maharashtra                                                         ]
Through Wai Police Station,                                                      ]
Tal. Wai, Dist. Satara                                                           ].. Respondent



                               ....
Mr. Aniket Ujjwal Nikam Advocate along with Mr. Aashish
Satpute Advocate and Mr. Piyush Toshnival Advocate on behalf
of Mr. Vibhav Gaikwada Advocate for Appellant
Mr. H.J.Dedia A.P.P. for the State
                               ....



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

DATED : JUNE 15, 2017

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

1                   Heard both sides.




                                                                                                    1   of  6





  jdk                                                      2                                            12.cr.apeal.312.17.doc


2                   This appeal is directed against the order dated

28.2.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge and Additional

Sessions Judge, Satara in Criminal Misc. (Bail) Application No.

78 of 2017 preferred by the appellant wherein he has sought

anticipatory bail. By the said order, the application of the

appellant for anticipatory bail came to be rejected. The said

anticipatory bail was preferred in CR No. 27 of 2017 of Wai

Police Station. The said case is under Sections 341, 354, 323,

504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and under Sections

3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) and 6 of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

3 On going through the material on record, we find that

prima facie, there is no material to support the allegations

under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act. As far as Section 3(1)(r) and

3(1)(s) are concerned, it is the case of the complainant that on

28.1.2017 there was no water in the building, hence, the

complainant asked the wife of the appellant why there was no

water. Thereupon, the appellant rushed upon her person and

told her to send her husband. At that time, as the appellant

came very close to the complainant, she stepped back. She

2 of 6

jdk 3 12.cr.apeal.312.17.doc

then told the wife of the appellant that she should tell her

husband how he should talk to a lady. Then the appellant

abused her. The complainant moved towards her house. At

that time, the wife of the appellant and one other lady came

behind her and told her to get out of the house. However, the

complainant went inside the house. It is the case of the

complainant that when she went into the house, the appellant

abused her in relation to her caste and abusing thus, he came

inside her house. He then touched her hand and shoulder, due

to which, she was embarrassed. The appellant then slapped

her 2 to 3 times and also kicked her in the stomach, due to

which, she fell down. It is the categorical case of the

complainant that this incident was witnessed by Amol Malusare

who was residing in front of her house. Amol Malusare then

came into her house to separate the quarrel. However, the

appellant also assaulted Amol Malusare and started abusing

him.

4 Thus, as per the complainant, the appellant first

abused her in relation to her caste and abusing thus, he came

inside her house. He then touched her hand and shoulder, due

to which, she was embarrassed. The appellant then slapped

3 of 6

jdk 4 12.cr.apeal.312.17.doc

her 2 to 3 times and also kicked her in the stomach, due to

which, she fell down. Thereafter Amol Malusare who witnessed

the incident, came into her house to separate the quarrel.

However, Amol Malusare on whom heavy reliance is placed by

the prosecution, has stated that as he heard sound of quarrel,

he came out of his flat. At that time, on enquiry being made, he

saw that on account of water there was quarrel and the

appellant and his wife went into the hall of the complainant,

then the appellant touched the hand and shoulder of the

complainant. When he went to separate quarrel and caught

hold of the hands of the appellant, the appellant caught hold of

his collar and assaulted him. The appellant then gave abuses

and pushed Amol Malusare away. Amol Malusare has stated

that thereafter the appellant gave abuses in relation to caste.

5 Thus, from the statements of these two witnesses, it is

clear that as far as the complainant is concerned, she has

stated that the appellant first gave abuses in relation to her

caste and thereafter, he touched her hand and shoulder, then

he slapped her and kicked her in the stomach which was

witnessed by Amol Malusare, however, Amol Malusare gives an

4 of 6

jdk 5 12.cr.apeal.312.17.doc

entirely different sequence of events. According to Amol

Malusare, first the appellant went into the house of the

complainant, touched her hand and shoulder and when Amol

Malusare went to separate quarrel, the appellant caught the

shirt collar of Amol Malusare and assaulted him and abused

him. Thereafter, the appellant is alleged to have given abuses

in relation to caste. Though, according to the complainant,

Amol Malusare is stated to have witnessed the incident of her

being slapped and kicked her in the stomach, due to which, she

fell down, Amol Malusare makes no reference at all to the same.

6 According to Amol Malusare, abuses in relation to

caste were given only after he went to the house of the

complainant to intervene in the quarrel whereas the

complainant states that first the appellant abused her in

relation to her caste and thereafter the entire incident of

appellant touching the hand and shoulder of the complainant

and slapping her and kicking her in the stomach due to which,

she fell down, Amol coming to her house and intervening

occurred. There is major discrepancy in the statements of the

complainant and eye witness Amol Malusare. In this view of the

5 of 6

jdk 6 12.cr.apeal.312.17.doc

matter, prima facie we are of the opinion that the appellant has

been falsely implicated in this case, thus, we are inclined to

grant anticipatory bail to the appellant. Hence, the following

order:

ORDER

(1) In the event of arrest, the appellant - Vishnu

Krishna Jadhav to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.

30,000/- (Rs. Thirty thousand only) with one or two

sureties to make up the said amount and P.R. Bond in

the like amount.

(2) The appellant shall report to Wai Police

Station every alternate day between 11.00 a.m. to 1

p.m. for a period of 15 days starting from 21.6.2017

and thereafter, the appellant shall attend the said

police station as and when required.

                                (3)                 Appeal is allowed in above terms.




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

kandarkar




                                                                                                                6   of  6