1
Cri. Bail Application No. 1271 / 2020
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Ramesh Dattu Kathe
Bharat Dattu Kathe
Nirmal Bharat Kathe
Rajendra Ramesh Kathe
Sau. Aasha Bharat Kathe
..
Applicants/
Accused.
The State of Maharashtra
through P.I. Nashik Taluka
Police Station, Nashik.
(Cr. No. I 59/2020 )
..
Respondent.
Manohar Jagannath Jadhav
..
Original
Complainant.
Vs.
1.
2.
Order below Exh.1
1.
This application has been filed by the applicants/accused
under section 438 of Cr.P.C. for releasing them on anticipatory bail in
Crime No. I 59/2020 registered at Nashik Taluka Police Station for the
offences punishable under section 143, 147, 148, 323, 336, 354, 504 &
506 of the Indian Penal Code and 3(1)(r)(s), 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(va) of
the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities Act).
2.
According to the prosecution case, the FIR was lodged by the
complainant – Manohar Jadhav on the allegation that he alongwith his
three brothers are the owners of the property admeasuring about 66
Gunthas out of Gat bearing No.343 (Old Gat No.469) situated at Jalalpur,
Tal. & Dist. Nashik. The said land is in their possession and they are
cultivating
the same. In the year 2017, he came to know that the
applicants had forged the documents, prepared false sale deed and
transferred the said land in their name. So, he filed Civil Suit bearing No.
2
280/2017 in the Court of Civil Judge, Sr.Divn., Nashik. The matter went
in the Appeal bearing No. 19/2020 and the Court has directed the parties
to maintain the Statusquo. In the month of March’ 2020, he alongwith
his two brothers were constructing Tin Shed in the disputed field.
On
21.03.2020, in between 4.00 and 5.00 a.m., the applicants alongwith 7 to
8 Gundas came there armed with iron rods & sticks. They started abusing
the complainant and his family members in filthy language. They uttered
the words ” ;k egkjM;ka u k [kw i ekt vkyk vkgs vkrk rq e pk ekt ftjforks egkjM;ka u ks rq E gka y k ?
kjnkjklfgr ckgs j Qs d rks – ” and they also threatened them with dire consequences.
They assaulted him and his brothers by fist blows. The applicant No. 1 &
2 manhandled the wife of the complainant and pulled her Saree.
people gathered there and they all fled from the spot.
The
They also
threatened them by saying that ” egkjM;ka u ks rq E gka lokZ a u k ftoa r lks M .kkj ukgh vkt rq E gkyk
ftos B kj ek#u rq e ph eq D rrk d#up vkEgh ijr tkrks – … ”
The complainant further alleged another incident dated
15.05.2020 that took place around 11.30 12.30 pm. All the accused
persons suddenly came to their land and again abused them in filthy
language by saying that ” egkjM;ka u ks rq e ph vkeps cjks c j Hkka M .k dj.;kph yk;dh vkgs dk;
vkeP;k ea = hui;Z a r vks G [kh vkgs r – R;keq G s iks y hl vkeps dkghgh okdMs d# ‘kdr ukgh rq E gh egkj
tkrhps vkgkr rq E gh rq e ph tkr nk[kfoyh— ” They also pelted stones on the Tin shed
and thereafter, left the place. The complainant then approached the
police on 18.09.2020 and lodged report against them.
The applicants are apprehending their arrest at the hands of
the police.
So, they filed present application for their protection/
anticipatory bail.
3.
The learned counsel Mr. G.P. Sanap appearing for the
applicants/accused has submitted that the applicant No.2 has purchased
3
the said property long back in the year 1991 by executing the registered
document. His name is also appearing on 7/12 extract. Since then he
became the exclusive owner of the property. Thereafter, there was family
settlement and the applicants got their respective shares in the said
property. Since 1991 they are in possession of the property. The
complainant and his family members have no concerned with the said
land. As there was tremendous hike in land prices in the village – Jalalpur
since 2016 and so, in order to extract money from the applicants, the
complainant has filed false Civil suit for cancellation of the sale deed.
The Court has rejected their Exh.5 application.
The learned counsel
further says that on 23.04.2020 the complainant and his family members
encroached the said land and started constructing Tin Shed.
The matter
was reported to the police station on the same day. The police has seized
the said Tin Shed and prepared panchanama accordingly.
The
complainant has filed an application before the Court for releasing the
said seized property. It is the complainant and his family members who
attempted to take possession of the said property despite the fact that the
matter is subjudiced before the Court. They also threatened that they will
implicate all the applicants in false atrocity case. Thus,all the contents in
the FIR are false.
The learned counsel further says that the spot of incident
shown in the FIR, is not a public place but it is the field and so, there is no
question of ‘public view ‘.
Further, the custodial interrogation of the
applicants is not required. There is nothing to recover or discover. They
are reputed persons in the Society. If they are Jailed, their reputation
would be at stake. They are ready to abide by all the terms & conditions
imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the application.
4
He has relied on following authorities.
a.
Sandip Machindra Patil & Others 2020 ALL MR (Cri) 1866.
b.
Kadubal Govind Gore Vs. The State of Maharashtra & others
2020 ALL MR (Cri) 1958.
c.
Janardhan Rambhau Tawde & others Vs. The State of Maharashtra
& others – 2020 ALL MR (Cri) 283.
d.
Raju @ Rajendra Dashrath Khaire & another Vs. The State of
Maharashtra & another – 2020 ALL MR (Cri) 140.
e.
Vasantrao s/o. Madhavrao Vhadgir & others Vs. The State of
Maharashtra & another – 2020 ALL MR (Cri) 365.
4.
The original complainant has appeared through his learned
counsels Miss. Sadhna Kumar / Mr. Akbar Hussain Pindhara. He has filed
his detail Say in line with the contents of the FIR at Exh.9 and the
documents alongwith list Exh.10. Learned counsel also relied on various
authorities. Lastly she prayed to reject the application.
5.
The Investigating Officer has filed his Say at Exh.12 and
strongly opposed the application stating that some of the accused are still
absconding.
disputed land.
They have to collect the documents pertaining to the
The statements of the eye witnesses are to be recorded.
The N.C. is registered against the applicant–Bharat Kate in Taluka Police
Station. The weapons used in the commission of the offence are yet to be
recovered. If the applicants are released on bail there is a possibility that
they may threat or induce the complainant and the witnesses. They may
tamper the evidence and the prosecution witnesses. Hence, he prays for
rejection of the application. The learned APP Smt. Bhide has submitted in
line with the Say filed by the Investigating Officer and prayed for rejection
of the application.
5
6.
After hearing both the sides and perusing the documents, it
appears that there is a property dispute between the parties and the
relations are strained. The contents of the FIR shows that applicants have
abused the complainant and his family members in filthy language
relating to their Caste and thus humiliated them. Though the accused have
denied the same but at this stage the Court cannot ascertain the
truthfulness of the FIR.
Section 18 of the Act, specifically bars the
application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. Prima facie it cannot be said that
the ingredients of the offence with which the accused are charged are
absent. Further the spot of incident is the field, so possibility cannot be
ruled out that outsiders might have heard such abuses. It is all part of
investigation. In such circumstances, I am not inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the applicants. Accordingly, the application is hereby
rejected.
Sandhya
Sunil Nair
Digitally signed by
Sandhya Sunil Nair
Date: 2020.10.03
16:00:10 +0530
( Smt. S.S. Nair )
Addl. Sessions Judge2, Nashik.
Date : 03.10.2020.
..