1
Cri.B.A.No.993/22OrderEx.1.
Order below Exh.1 in Bail Application No. 993/2022
Pritam Satish Deshmukh
..
Applicant/
Accused.
..
Prosecution
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
through Police Inspector,
Dindori Police Station, Dindori.
(Cr. No.I 268/2022)
Order below Exh.1.
1.
The
applicants/accused Pritam Satish
Deshmukh
claims anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in C.R. No. I
268/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the
Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
registered with Dindori Police Station.
2.
Heard
Learned Advocate Shri
S.R.Borade, for
the
applicant, learned A.P.P. Smt. Aparna Patil for the State and perused
the say filed by informant at Exh.6. Perused the papers of
investigation.
3.
It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant and
other accused have abused wife of informant by uttering abusive
words in the name of their caste and thereby humiliated her.
2
4.
Cri.B.A.No.993/22OrderEx.1.
Learned Advocate for applicant submitted that there is
transaction between the applicant family and the informant in respect
of rented premises.
It is pointed out that the report lodged by the
informant is self contradictory with his supplementary statement.
There is much delay in lodging report which is not explained.
This
aspect itself is sufficient to create doubt about veracity of the report.
There is no mention in the report that accused belongs to upper caste.
It is further pointed out that the alleged incident is not witnessed by
any of the neighbouring shopkeepers. NC was lodged on 01.08.2022.
But there is no allegation in the said NC that the accused uttered any
abusive words in the name of caste of the informant.
Thus, it is the
contention of learned Advocate for applicant that after thought report
is lodged to pressurize the applicant family. Hence, it is prayed that
the anticipatory bail be granted to applicant.
In support of his
contention, ld. Advocate for applicant relied on following authorities.
1/
Vasantrao Madhavrao Vhadgir
Maharashtra, 2020 ALL MR (Cri) 365.
Vs.
State
2/
Nitin Sampatrao Maske Vs. State of Maharashtra,
ALL MR (Cri) 2983.
of
2019
3/
Sitaram Mahadu Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2012 ALL
MR (Cri) 1097.
4/
State of Maharashtra Vs. Parmeshwar Gurubasappa,
2008 ALL MR (Cri) 2677,
5/
Abdul Abbas Vs. State of Chhatisgarh, 2005 Cri.L.J. 3051.
6/
Somesh
Cri.L.J.680.
7/
Das
Vs.
State
of
Chhatisgarh,
Phulla Dass Vs. State of Punjab, 1998 Cri.L.J. 157.
2004
3
8/
Cri.B.A.No.993/22OrderEx.1.
Ramesh Prasad Vs. State of Orissa, 1996 Cri.L.J.
2743.
9/
Kedarsingh Dharma Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2019
ALL MR (Cri) 2974.
Sum and substance of the ratio in the aforesaid
authorities is that prima facie FIR did not reflect intent or mensria to
humiliate complainant on his caste within public view, bar under
Section 18 of the SC & ST Act not attracted – Delay in lodging FIR as
to abuse by caste name raised grave doubt in the mind regarding the
veracity of the complaint.
5.
In the present matter, record reflects that previous
complaint lodged by the informant is in detail.
But there is no
mention as to alleged humiliation by abusive in the name of caste.
Apparently, there is delay of near about 4 months to lodge report,
after the alleged incident.
Therefore, such delay prima facie create
doubt about the veracity of the complaint.
Moreover, there is no
mention in the report that the accused belongs to upper caste and are
not the members of SC & ST.
There is no mention in the report
whether accused had a knowledge about the caste of the informant.
These are primary ingredients of offence under Section 3(1) of the SC
& ST Act to consider prima facie case and to grant the relief of pre
arrest bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
Further, it is to be taken
note of that there are no averments as to intention on the part of
accused and that the incident occurred within public view. Thus, on
all counts, it is to be held that bar under Section 18 of SC & ST Act
not attracted.
4
6.
Cri.B.A.No.993/22OrderEx.1.
Learned Advocate for applicant submitted that applicant
is agriculturist and is taking education and he has no criminal
antecedents.
He is ready to abide any condition on grant of
anticipatory bail.
Considering all these aspect, this Court is of the
view that applicant can be released on anticipatory bail by imposing
certain stringent conditions. Hence, the order.
:: O R D E R ::
1]
The application is allowed.
2]
In the event of arrest, ApplicantAccused Pritam
Satish Deshmukh arrested in C.R. No. I
268/2022 for the offences punishable under
Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC & ST Act registered
with Dindori Police Station, be released on bail
in the sum of Rs.15,000/(Rupees Fifteen
Thousand only) with one or two sureties in the
like amount subject to following conditions :
a] That he shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence in any manner.
b] Applicant is directed not to contact any witness
and interfere with the investigation in any
manner.
c] Applicant is directed to furnish his permanent
address proof, mobile number and copies of
medical treatment papers on record.
Inform concerned police station accordingly.
ADITEE
UDAY
KADAM
Nashik.
Date : 18.08.2022.
Digitally
signed by
ADITEE
UDAY
KADAM
Date:
2022.08.18
18:04:08 0600
(Aditee U. Kadam)
Additional Sessions Judge2,
Nashik.