abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 581 OF 2008 Gyaneshwar K. Upadhyay .. Applicant V/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.A.P. Mundargi i/b Mr.S.V. Marwadi for the applicant. Mr.S.S. Pednekar, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 13TH MARCH 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicant seeks bail in connection with C.R. No.I-118/2007 registered with Kashimira Police Station for the alleged offences punishable under sections 461, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "the Atrocities Act"). 3. The complainant Yeshwant Gokhale, who claims to - 2 - belong to Adivasi Halba caste, filed an FIR at Kashimira Police Station alleging that he was the owner of the land bearing Survey No.83 Hissa No.1 to the extent of 500 sq.m. and had constructed a shed thereon in the year 2000. The complainant let out a part of the said shed to the applicant in the year 2004 for a period of 11 months. The applicant did not return possession of the shed after expiry of the period of the lease and disputes are going on between the complainant and the applicant regarding the said premises. According to the complainant, the applicant prepared certain false documents to claim right in the said shed and on that count the complainant had lodged the first complaint with the police on 10th May 2007. The applicant was called by the police in the police station for investigation. Being aggrieved by that complaint, the applicant along with his son abused the complainant on 14th May 2007 using abuses referable to his caste. He therefore filed the second FIR, that is the present FIR, against the applicant. 4. The applicant was arrested on or about 17th October 2007 in connection with the present crime. on rejection of his application for bail by the Sessions Court, the applicant moved this Court for bail. By an order dated 19th December 2007 passed in Criminal Application No.3795 of 2007, this Court granted bail to - 3 - the applicant in the sum of Rs.30,000/- for a limited time, that is till the filing of the charge sheet. This Court further held that the applicant was entitled to apply for bail before the regular court after the charge sheet was filed. 5. The charge sheet was filed on 3rd January 2008 and thereupon the applicant approached the Sessions Court with fresh application for bail. By an order dated 8th February 2008, the learned Sessions Judge rejected the said application. The applicant has therefore approached this Court with the present application for bail. 6. The applicant has surrendered before the Sessions Court in pursuance of the order dated 4th March 2008 passed by this Court and is presently in custody. 7. I have perused the FIR as also the papers along with the charge sheet, copies of which have been annexed to this application. Since the matter is pending trial, it would be inappropriate to consider in detail the evidence in the present case. However, suffice it to say that there is civil dispute between the parties regarding possession of the premises which admittedly were let out by the complainant to the applicant. The first complaint was fall out of that civil dispute. - 4 - 8. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the second complaint has been filed only with a view to coerce the applicant to surrender the premises. He submitted that the applicant did not even know that the complainant belongs to Adivasi Halba caste and therefore there was no question of applicant abusing the complainant referable to his caste and he has been falsely implicated in the case. 9. Taking into consideration the material on record, the possibility of the false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out altogether. The maximum punishment for the offence is 5 years. The investigation has been completed. It does not appear the necessary to keep the applicant in custody for the purpose of investigation. In the circumstances, taking an overall view of the matter, the applicant is entitled to bail. Hence, I pass the following order:- ORDER ORDER ORDER The applicant be released on bail in connection with the offence mentioned above on executing personal bond of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15,000/- each subject to the condition that the applicant shall not make any inducement or threats to the prosecution - 5 - witnesses. (D.G. KARMIC, J.)