Vivek Govindrao Ingole And 2 ... vs The State Of Mah. Thr Its Pso Ps ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17085 Bom

                                      1                                      APEAL340.21.odt


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               : NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.


                    CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 340 OF 2021


APPELLANT                   : 1] Vivek Govindrao Ingole,
                                 Aged about 54 years, Occu. Service,
                                 as a Naib Tahsildar, Digras,
                                 Tq. Digras, Dist. Yavatmal

                               2] Devidas Kacharu Athawale,
                                  Aged about 52 years, Occu. Service as a
                                  Police Head Constable, Digras,
                                  Tq. Digras, Dist. Yavatmal.

                               3] Narayan Ramchandra Hagwane,
                                  Aged about 54 years, Occu. Service,
                                  as a Talathi, Mouza Kalgaon,
                                  Tq. Digras, Dist. Yavatmal.

                                             VERSUS

RESPONDENTS                 : 1. The State of Maharashtra,
                                 through its Police Station Officer,
                                 Police Station, Dirgas,
                                 Tah. Digras, Dist. Yavatmal.

                               2. Kalpana Ambadas Jawade,
                                  Age about 38 years, Occu. Agriculturist,
                                  R/o Kalgaon, Tq. Digras, Dist. Yavatmal.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Mr. R. J. Shinde, Advocate for the appellants.
          Mr. V. A. Thakare, A. P. P. for the respondent no.1
          Mr. S. N. Nandeshwar, Advocate for respondent no.2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE J.
                DATE : DECEMBER 08, 2021.
                            2                         APEAL340.21.odt


ORAL JUDGMENT



            Heard Mr. R. J. Shinde, learned counsel for the

appellants, Mr. V. A. Thakare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

for respondent no.1/State and Mr. S. N. Nandeshwar, learned counsel

for respondent no.2/complainant.



2.          ADMIT. Taken up for final disposal by consent of the

learned counsel for the parties.



3.          The appellants have filed this appeal under Section 14-A

of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocities Act"

for the sake of brevity) since their application i.e. Misc. Criminal

Application No. 98/2021 for grant of pre-arrest bail was rejected by

the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Darwha on 29.07.2021.



4.          On 23.08.2021, this Court (Coram : Vinay Joshi, J.)

granted interim protection to the appellants with a direction that the

appellants shall attend the Police Station on every Sunday. There is
                           3                          APEAL340.21.odt


no dispute that the appellants have attended the police station.



5.          Mr. R. J. Shinde, learned counsel for the appellants

submitted that the appellants themselves belong to Scheduled Caste

as well as Scheduled Tribe and therefore, the penal provisions of the

Atrocities Act cannot be applied against them. He further submitted

that the appellants are Government servants.



6.          The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State

and learned counsel for respondent no.2 complainant also concur

with the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants

that the appellants are the members of Scheduled Caste as well as

Scheduled Tribe.



7.          The offence in which the appellants are apprehending

their arrest is under Sections 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Admittedly, the appellants are the Government servants, they being

Naib Tahsildar, Head Constable and Talathi.         Even as per the

prosecution case, no weapon was used by any of the appellants. In

view of the fact that the appellants are Government servant, there is
                            4                           APEAL340.21.odt


least possibility that they will not be available for the course of

justice in due course of time.



8.           Presently, the question is whether custodial presence of

the appellants is required or not.       Looking to the fact that the

appellants have not used any weapon, further they are Government

servants and they have scrupulously followed the conditions imposed

upon them by this court, I am of the view that the appeal needs to be

allowed. Resultantly, I pass the following order :

                                 ORDER

1. The Criminal Appeal is allowed.

2. The order passed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Darwha in Misc. Criminal Application No.

98/2021, dated 29.07.2021, thereby rejecting the

application for anticipatory bail of the appellants, is

hereby quashed and set aside.

3. The appellants - (1) Vivek Govindrao Ingole ; (2)

Devidas Kacharu Athawale; and (3) Narayan

Ramchandra Hagwane, in the event of their arrest in

connection with Crime No. 827/2021 registered with 5 APEAL340.21.odt

Police Station, Digras, Dist. Yavatmal for the offence

punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 of the Indian

Penal Code and under Sections 3(1)(v), 3(1)(x) of the

Atrocities Act, be released on bail on they executing PR

bond of Rs.5,000/- each.

4. The appellants are directed to attend the police station

as and when called by the Investigating Officer, however

for that the Investigating Officer shall give them clear

cut 72 hours prior written communication. They shall

not be called except on Sunday.

5. With these directions, the appeal is disposed of.

JUDGE

Diwale

Digitally signed byPARAG PRABHAKARRAO DIWALE Signing Date:09.12.2021 16:22