Bombay High Court
Champat Ganu Thamke And Other vs State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso. Ps. ... on 4 April, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:3817
1 14APPEAL108.2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 108 OF 2025
APPELLANTS 1. Champat Ganu Thamke,
Aged about 67 years, Occupation :
Agriculturist.
2. Prashant Champat Thamke,
Aged about 32 years, Occupation:
Agriculturist.
3. Darshana @ Sonu w/o Prashant Thamke,
Aged about 25 years, Occupation:
Housewife.
4. Sindhubai w/o Champat Thamke,
Aged about 51 years, Occupation:
Agriculturist. The applicant Nos. 2 to 4
R/o Patharpur, Post Nerad- Purad, Tq.
Wani, Distt- Yavatmal.
-VERSUS-
RESPONDENTS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through
P.S.O., P.S. Mukutban, Tq. Zari-Jamani,
Distt - Yavatmal as well as Sub-Divisional
Police Officer, Wani, District Yavatmal.
2. Vijay Nimbaji Gedam,
Aged about 50 years, Occupation: Labour,
R/o Patharpur, Po: Nerrad - Pusad, Tq.
Wani, District Yavatmal.
rkn
2 14APPEAL108.2025.odt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. M.I. Dhatrak, counsel for appellant.
Mr. C.A. Lokhande, APP for respondent/State.
Mr. R.S. Bhalerao, counsel (appointed) for respondent No.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATE : 04/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard.
2. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned
counsels appearing for the parties.
3. By preferring this appeal, the appellants have
challenged the order passed by the Special Judge and Additional
Sessions Judge-2, Kelapur, District-Yavatmal, rejecting the
application of the present appellants for grant of anticipatory bail
in connection with Crime No.8/2025 registered with police station
Mukutban, Tahsil Zari-Jamani, District Yavatmal for the offences
punishable under Sections 3(5), 118(2) and 109 of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 6, 3(2)(va), 3(2)(V), 3(1)(s),
3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989.
4. The appellants are apprehending arrest at the hands
rkn
3 14APPEAL108.2025.odt
of police as crime is registered against them, on an allegation that
on 23/12/2024 when son of the informant was feeding bread to
dog, at that time, the appellant No.4 abused the informant on her
caste, and the appellant No.2 Prashant Champat Thamke came
there holding stick in his hands as well as the other appellants also
came there. They abused the informant and her son on their caste
and also assaulted them, due to which the son of the informant
has sustained the injuries. On the basis of the said report, police
have registered the crime against the present appellants.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that
even accepting the allegation as it is, no offence is made out and
the incriminating articles are already seized therefore, the
custodial interrogation of the present appellants is not required.
He further submitted that bar under Section 18 of the Act of 1989
will not attract. In view of that, he prays for releasing the all the
appellants on bail.
6. Learned APP strongly opposed the appeal and
submitted that, in view of bar under Section 18 of the Act of 1989,
the prayer of the appellant No.4 Sindhubai deserves to be rejected.
He further submitted that on perusal of the recitals of the FIR,
rkn
4 14APPEAL108.2025.odt
specific allegation is levelled against the said Sindhubai and the
quarrel was started on a trifle reason, and on that trifle reason, the
son of the informant was assaulted, who was admitted in the
hospital for ten days. He was under treatment for ten days, as he
has sustained the head injury. In view of that, the appeal as far as
the appellant No.4 is concerned, deserves to be dismissed.
7. After hearing both sides, and on perusal of the recitals
of the FIR, and the investigation papers, the omnibus allegations
are levelled against the appellant Nos. 1, 2 and 3, as to the abuses
and humiliation and insult on the caste. As far as the appellant
No.4 is concerned, against whom the specific allegations are level
that she has abused the informant and her son on her caste.
Whether it attracts the provisions of the Atrocities Act or not, is a
matter of consideration. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Shajan Skaria Vs. The State Of Kerala & anr. in Criminal Appeal
No.2622 of 2024 (arising out of SLP (CRL.) No.8081 of 2023)
decided on 23/08/2024 wherein it is held that all insults or
intimidations to a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled
Tribe will not amount to an offence under the Act, 1989 unless
such insult or intimidation is on the ground that the victim belongs
rkn
5 14APPEAL108.2025.odt
to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The various decisions
which are considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court and it is further
held that the purport of the Act, 1989 and held that it is not the
purport of the Act, 1989 that every act of intentional insult or
intimidation meted by a person who is not a member of a
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe to a person who belongs to a
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe would attract Section 3(1)(r)
of the Act, 1989 merely because it is committed against a person
who happens to be a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled
Tribe. On the contrary, Section 3(1)(r) of the Act, 1989 is attracted
where the reason for the intentional insult or intimidation is that
the person who is subjected to it belongs to a Scheduled Caste or
Scheduled Tribe.
8. In view of the above observation if the facts of the
present case are taken into consideration admittedly, there is a
specific allegations levelled against the appellant no.4, she is
aware about the fact that, the informant and her son belongs to
the Scheduled Caste. Thus, the prima-facie case is made out
against the appellant No.4, in view of that, the appeal deserves to
be allowed partly. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following
order:
rkn
6 14APPEAL108.2025.odt
a] The appeal is allowed partly.
b] In the event of the arrest, the appellants -
1) Champat Ganu Thamke, 2) Prashant
Champat Thamke, 3) Darshana @ Sonu w/o
Prashant Thamke in connection with Crime
No.8/2025 registered with police station
Mukutban, Tahsil Zari-Jamani, District
Yavatmal for the offence punishable under
Sections 3(5), 118(2) and 109 of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 6, 3(2)(va),
3(2)(V), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled
Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989, shall be released on
anticipatory bail on executing P.R. bond of
Rs.25,000/- each with one solvent surety each
in the like amount.
c] The appellant Nos. 1 to 3 shall attend the
concerned police station as and when
required.
d] The appellants shall not induce, threat or
rkn
7 14APPEAL108.2025.odt
promise any witnesses who are acquainted
with the facts of the case.
e] The order passed by the Special Judge,
Kelapur in Criminal Bail Application No.
12/2025 dated 13/02/2025 is partly quashed
and set aside.
f] The prayer of the appellant No.4 as to the
grant of anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.
g] The appellant Nos. 1 to 3 shall not induce,
threat or promise any witnesses who are
acquainted with the facts of the case either
personally or by way of electronic media.
h] The contravention of any of the conditions
imposed by this Court, would lead to the
cancellation of bail.
i] The fees of the appointed counsel be
quantified as per Rule.
9. The criminal appeal is disposed of partly.
[URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.]
rkn
