Bombay High Court
Mohan Sunil Munde And Another vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Dhamangao ... on 12 August, 2024
2024:BHC-NAG:9097
J.52.cri.appeal.299.24.odt 1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.299 OF 2024
1) Mohan Sunil Munde,
Age 22 years,
Occupation - Labour,
R/o Lapali, Tal - Motala,
District Buldhana
2) Dipak Suresh Renuke,
Age - 28 years,
Occupation - Labour,
R/o. Lapali, Tal - Motala,
District Buldhana
...APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station
Dhamangaon Bade
Tal - Motala, District Buldhana
2. The Superintendent of Police
Tal & District Buldhana
3. Dhanraj Jayraj Chauke,
Age - 31 years, Occupation - Labour,
R/o. Lapali, Tal - Motala,
District Buldhana
...RESPONDENTS
_______________________________________________________
Mr. S.A. Kulkarni, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. C.A. Lokhande, APP for the State.
Ms F.N. Haidari, Advocate (appointed) for respondent No.3.
_______________________________________________________
J.52.cri.appeal.299.24.odt 2/5
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED : AUGUST 12, 2024.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
ADMIT. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel
for the parties.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14A of the Scheduled Caste
and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Atrocities Act' for short), the appellants have
challenged the order dated 08/05/2024 whereby the Special Judge,
Malkapur rejected the anticipatory bail application of the appellants
bearing Criminal (Anticipatory) Bail Application No.115/2024.
3. The appellants are apprehending arrest at the hands of
police in connection with Crime No.71/2024 registered with Police
Station Dhamangaon Bade, District Buldhana for the offence punishable
under Sections 324, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989.
4. The accusation against the present appellants are on the
basis of the report lodged by the informant Dhanaraj Jayraj Chouke on
an allegation that on 20/03/2024 at about 3.00 p.m. he and his friend
J.52.cri.appeal.299.24.odt 3/5
had been to the house of one Santosh Gaikwad for some construction
work. At the relevant time appellant No.1 came there and assaulted
them by means of plastic pipe. Appellant No.2 beat the victim with a
stick. It is alleged that both the appellants abused and threatened the
informant and the victim. On the basis of said report, police have
registered the crime. After registration of the crime they approached to
the Special Court by filing an application for grant of anticipatory bail
but the same was rejected in view of the bar under Section 18 of the
Atrocities Act. Being aggrieved with the same, present appeal is
preferred by the appellants.
5. Learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that as far as
application of provisions of Atrocities Act is concerned, there is even no
whisper regarding caste of the present informant. There is no abuses on
their caste also. After thought after 20 days the said allegations are made
by the informant. He further submitted that he has produced the caste
certificate on 01/04/2024 and thereafter his statement was recorded on
02/04/2024. He submitted that initially there was no allegation as to the
abuses on the caste subsequently this allegation is made. As far as bar
under Section 18 or 18A of the Atrocities Act is not attracted and general
allegations are made against the present appellants.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned Counsel
for respondent No.3 strongly opposed the prayer on the ground that in
J.52.cri.appeal.299.24.odt 4/5
view of bar under Section 18 and 18A of the Atrocities Act, the
application is not maintainable. Hence, the appeal is devoid of merits
and liable to be dismissed.
7. I have heard learned Counsel for both the parties. Perused
the investigation papers from which it reveals that there is no allegation
as to the abuses on the caste and subsequently after 15 days of the
lodging of the FIR this allegation is made by the informant and the other
witnesses. The allegation is also general in nature and if that allegation
is also taken into consideration it only refers to the caste. As far as bar
under Sections 18 or 18A of the Atrocities Act is concerned if the prima
facie case is not made from the recitals of the FIR, the application for
anticipatory bail is maintainable. Hence, the appellants are made out a
case for grant of anticipatory bail. In view of that, the interim protection
granted to the present appellants vide order dated 21/05/2024 deserves
to be confirmed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order :
(i) The appeal is allowed.
(ii) The order dated 08/05/2024 passed by the Special
Judge, Malkapur in Criminal (Anticipatory) Bail Application
No.115/2024, is hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) In the event of arrest, the appellants - 1) Mohan Sunil
Munde and 2) Dipak Suresh Renuke in connection with
J.52.cri.appeal.299.24.odt 5/5
Crime No.71/2024 registered with Police Station
Dhamangaon Bade for the offence punishable under
Sections 324, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and
3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, be released on
anticipatory bail on executing P.R. bond in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- each with one solvent surety each in the like
amount.
(iv) The appellants shall attend the concerned Police
Station once in a week on Sunday between 10.00 a.m. to
01.00 p.m. and shall cooperate with the investigating
agency.
(v) The appellants shall not induce, threat or promise any
witnesses who are acquainted with the facts of the present
case.
8. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
9. The fees of the appointed Counsel be quantified as per rules.
(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)
*Divya
