Bombay High Court
Nitin S/O Ganeshrao Yelne vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O. ... on 9 January, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
1 cr-apl-271-20j.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 271 OF 2020
Nitin S/o. Ganeshrao Yelne,
Age 41 years, Occ. Private,
R/o. Punjab Colony, Gajanan Nagar,
Ward No. 2, Pipri (Meghe),
Tah. & Dist. Wardha. . . . APPELLANT
...V E R S U S..
1. State of Maharashtra through
Police Station Officer,
Police Station Ramnagar,
Wardha, Dist. Wardha.
2. Ranjeet Punjabrao Mungale,
Age 25 years, Occ. Labour,
R/o. Gajanan Nagar, Wardha,
Tah. Wardha, Dist. Wardha. . . RESPONDENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri R. R. Vyas, Advocate for appellant.
Ms. Mayuri Deshmukh, A.P.P. for respodent no.1/State.
Smt. S. P. Giratkar, Advocate for respondent no. 2.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM :- Z. A. HAQ AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED :- 09.01.2021
JUDGMENT (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :-
1. Heard.
2. Admit.
2 cr-apl-271-20j.odt
3. This is an appeal under Section 14A of the the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
(in short "the Act of 1989") against the order dated 10.07.2020 passed
by the Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha in Cri. Bail Application No.
320/2020 seeking pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of Code of
Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) in relation to Crime No. 299/2020
registered under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989.
4. The First Information Report (FIR) came to be registered
against the appellant with accusation that the appellant assaulted the
respondent no. 2 with iron rod and injured him. The appellant
therefore, approached the Sessions Judge by way of an application
under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., which was rejected by the impugned
order. The appellant has therefore, filed the present appeal before this
Court. This Court on 17.07.2020 issued notice to the respondents and
granted protection to the appellant.
5. The respondent no. 2 is served and Smt. S. P. Giratkar,
Advocate appointed by Legal Services Authority to represent the
respondent no. 2.
3 cr-apl-271-20j.odt
6. We have carefully considered the contents of the FIR and
other material on record. Prime facie, on perusal of the statement of
the informant dated 16.06.2020 and considering the nature of injury
alleged to have been inflected by the present appellant, we are
satisfied that the order of grant of interim protection deserves to be
confirmed. The appellant has stated that there is no other crime
registered against him. The prosecution has not pointed out that
custodial interrogation of the appellant is necessary. The prosecution
has not pointed out that the appellant has misused liberty granted to
him by order dated 17.07.2020.
7. We have carefully consider the contents of FIR in the
context of the provisions of the Act of 1989. After having considered
averments in the FIR, we are satisfied that accusation in the FIR, prima
facie do not disclose offence under the provisions of the Act of 1989.
We therefore, pass the following order :-
(i) The order dated 10.07.2020 passed by the Additional
Sessions Judge, Wardha in Cri. Bail Application No. 320/2020 is
quashed and set aside.
(ii) The order of granting interim protection dated 17.07.2020
is confirmed subject to the same condition stated in the said order.
4 cr-apl-271-20j.odt
The Criminal Appeal is allowed in the above terms.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 314 OF 2020
In view of the disposal of the present appeal, the Criminal
Application praying for time to file certified copy of order dated
10.07.2020 does not survive. It is disposed accordingly
JUDGE JUDGE
RR Jaiswal
