(1) CRI.APP. 3256.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3256 OF 2010 Shashikala d/o Dhondiba Gagare Age : 38 years, Occu.: Agri. & Business, R/o: At Post : Palshi, Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar .. Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. K.N. Lokhande, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. B.J. Sonawane, APP for the respondent-State ... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 9TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. This is an Application for anticipatory bail filed under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The applicant apprehends her arrest in connection with crime no. I-188 of 2007 registered at Parner Police Station for offence punishable under section 323, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(1)(x) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and section 7(1)(d) of the Protection of Civil Rights Act. (2) CRI.APP. 3256.2010 3. The FIR purports to show that on 11.7.2007 incident took place at about 10.00 am. at the place of Gramsabha. The applicant approached the complainant after the Tashildar left the place and on completion of the Gramsabha proceedings she abused him saying that Mahar people shall not teach her and also assaulted him. 4. It appears prima face that on the same day the applicant lodged a complaint against the complainant i.e. Shankar Salve. Her complaint purports to show that he had abused and mandhandled her at about 11:30 am. on the same day. It further appears that though the complainant lodged report on the same day, yet it did not show any allegation about abuses or insult caused by the applicant on ground of his being member of scheduled caste. It appears that subsequently, he improvised the complaint and the FIR was registered on 28.7.2007 about the incident occurred on 11.7.2007. The medical certificate shows that he had received blunt (3) CRI.APP. 3256.2010 trauma on left cheek. It was found to be simple injury. It was not physical injury as such. 5. Considering the rival allegations made against each other in the counter complaints, the applicant deserves protection from arrest because she is likely to be humiliated in the event of arrest though there was no immediate disclosure about her involvement in the non-bailable offence. 6. In the result, the Application is allowed in the terms of order dated 25.8.2010 which shall be continued till filing of the chargesheet. Application disposed of. Sd/- [V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp