Bombay High Court
Santosh Wamanrao Bharekar vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 10 January, 2024
Author: M. S. Karnik
Bench: M. S. Karnik
2024:BHC-AS:1259
Diksha Rane 36. APEAL 1412-23.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1412/2023
SANTOSH WAMANRAO BHAREKAR ..APPELLANT
VS.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ..RESPONDENTS
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1414/2023
(NOT ON BOARD; TAKEN ON BOARD)
RAHUL SHIVAJIRAO JADHAV ..APPELLANT
VS.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ..RESPONDENTS
------------
Adv. Satyavrat Joshi i/b. Adv. Samay Pawar for the appellant
in Appeal/1412/2023.
None for the appellant in Appeal/1414/2023.
Ms. S. D. Shinde, APP for the State.
Adv. Sushan Mhatre for the respondent no.2 in both appeals.
------------
CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.
DATE : JANUARY 10, 2024.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal
Appeal No. 1412/2023. None appeared for the appellant in
Criminal Appeal No.1414/2023. Heard learned APP for the
State. I have requested Mr. Sushan Mhatre to represent the
respondent no.2 - complainant in both appeals which he
Diksha Rane 36. APEAL 1412-23.doc
graciously agreed.
2. After hearing learned counsel Mr. Satyavrat Joshi in
Criminal Appeal No.1412/2023, the other connected
Criminal Appeal No.1414/2023 by co-accused Rahul
Shivajirao Jadhav who is having more or less a similar role is
also heard, as the fate of Santosh's appeal will decide that
of Rahul's appeal as well.
3. The appellants are the accused in respect of the
C.R.No.169/2023 registered with Koregaon Park Police
Station, Pune, on 8/10/2023 under Sections 354, 323, 506
read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereafter 'IPC' for
short) read with Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w) of the The
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereafter 'the Atrocities Act' for short).
4. The incident happened sometime between 4.00 a.m.
and 5.00 a.m. in the morning. The accused, who are three in
number, had been to one Pub in Koregaon Park. One of the
accused is the wife of Santosh. The respondent no.2-
complainant was also present in the Pub. When the
complainant came across the appellant Santosh and other
accused, a quarrel took place. The complainant alleges that
Diksha Rane 36. APEAL 1412-23.doc
these appellants abused her in the name of her caste and
further assaulted her. It is alleged that the appellants
Santosh and Rahul spat on her. The bouncers present at the
Pub intervened to separate the quarrel.
5. Mr. Mhatre, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 as
well as learned APP submitted that the incident happened in
full public view and there is no reason to disbelieve the
version of the respondent no.2. It is submitted that the
appellants abused the complainant in the name of her
caste, spat on her and hence, the ingredients of alleged
offence under the Atrocities Act is clearly attracted. It is the
submission of learned APP as well as Mr. Mhatre that bar
under Section 18 of the Atrocities Act will apply in the
present case.
6. I am informed by learned APP that during the
pendency of these appeals, the charge-sheet has been filed.
Though there were several persons present, in none of the
statements of the witnesses there is reference about the
appellants abusing the respondent no.2 in the name of her
caste. The statements of the bouncers who were present
were also recorded. Though there is a reference to the
Diksha Rane 36. APEAL 1412-23.doc
quarrel having taken place and abuses hurled, there is
nothing to indicate that the abuses are in the name of the
caste. The incident is captured on C.C.T.V. footage of the
Pub. Learned APP, on instructions of the investigating officer
fairly submitted that it cannot be deciphered from such
video recording that the abuses have been in the name of
the caste. From the statement of the prosecutrix, it appears
that the appellant Santosh and the respondent no.2 were
well known to each other. It is the allegation of the
prosecutrix that the appellant Santosh on prior occasions
had tried to befriend her and be intimate with her. Thus
there appear to be no independent witnesses to corroborate
the version of the prosecutrix.
7. As indicated earlier, even the charge-sheet has been
filed. In this view of the matter, in my opinion, in the facts
and circumstances of the case, the bar under Section 18 of
the Atrocities Act will not be attracted.
8. The appeals are allowed.
9. In the event of arrest of the appellants - Santosh
Wamanrao Bharekar and Rahul Shivajirao Jadhav in
C.R.No.169/2023 registered with Koregaon Park Police
Diksha Rane 36. APEAL 1412-23.doc
Station, Pune, be released on their furnishing P.R. bonds in
the sum of Rs.20,000/- each with one or more sureties in the
like amount.
10. The appellants shall report to the investigating officer
as and when called.
11. The appellants shall attend the trial regularly.
12. The appellants shall furnish their contact numbers and
residential addresses to the Investigating Officer and shall
keep him updated, in case there is any change.
13. It is made clear that the observations made are prima
facie, in nature, limited to deciding the present appeals and
shall not influence the trial Judge while deciding the trial on
its own merits.
14. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
15. I appreciate the assistance rendered by Mr. Sushan
Mhatre, the learned counsel, who appeared on behalf of the
respondent no.2-complainant in both the appeals.
(M. S. KARNIK, J.)
Signed by: Diksha Rane
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 11/01/2024 18:23:01
