..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2274 OF 2008 Pradeep Vishnusa Kabade. ..Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. .... Mr.S.V.Kotwal, Adv. for the Applicant. Mr.K.V.Saste, APP, for the State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 11th July, 2008. DATED : 11th July, 2008. DATED : 11th July, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.3109 of 2008 of Bhosari police station. The said case is under Sections 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. The case of the complainant is that he was abused by the applicant referring to his caste. I have perused the FIR. It is noticed that in the FIR the complainant has not stated the caste of the accused person. ..(2).. 4. Useful reference may be made to a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mukesh Kumar Saini Mukesh Kumar Saini Mukesh Kumar Saini Vs. State (Delhi Administration) Vs. State (Delhi Administration) Vs. State (Delhi Administration) reported in 2002 2002 2002 ALL MR (Cri) JOURNAL 41 ALL MR (Cri) JOURNAL 41 ALL MR (Cri) JOURNAL 41 In the said case, it was observed that there must be specific accusation alleged against each of the accused and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be pressed into service. Omnibus statement that all the accused persons uttered allegedly humiliating word may not be enough. In the present case there is no specific accusation alleged against each of the accused. 5. In addition to the above, it is seen that in the statement of the complainant there is no reference to caste of the accused. It is noticed that the complainant has not stated anywhere that the accused person do not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. It is incumbent on the part of the complainant to state the caste of not only the complainant but also of the accused. Useful reference can be made to the decision of this Court in the case of Ashabala Ganeshrao Khote & Anr. Vs. Ashabala Ganeshrao Khote & Anr. Vs. Ashabala Ganeshrao Khote & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra State of Maharashtra State of Maharashtra, reported in 1992(2) Mh.L.J. 1992(2) Mh.L.J. 1992(2) Mh.L.J. page-36 page-36 page-36, wherein this Court has held that Section 3 ..(3).. of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, contemplates that the prosecution must establish that accused was not member of scheduled caste or scheduled tribe and the person aggrieved was the member of scheduled caste or scheduled tribe. This is the important ingredient to establish offence under Section 3 of the Act. 6. In the present case, the complainant in his FIR has not stated the caste of the accused person. To attract the provisions of Section 3(1)(x) of the Act, the complaint has not only to reveal the caste of the person who is sought to be insulted or intimidated or humiliated but he should also disclose that such person belongs to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and simultaneously the complaint should also reveal that the person who is accused of commission of such offence does not belong either to a Scheduled caste or to a Scheduled Tribe. It is only when the accusation with an intention to insult or intimidate or to humiliate has been made by a person not belonging either to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and addressed to the person belonging to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, only in that case, he could be said to have committed an offence ..(4).. under section 3(1)(x) of the said Act and not otherwise. Obviously, therefore, if the complaint does not disclose that the accused person do not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, it would not disclose an offence in terms of the said section hence, Section 18 of the Act would not be attracted. In this view of the matter, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant - Pradeep Vishnusa Kabade to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. The applicant shall report to Bhosari police station, as and when required. 8. Criminal Application is disposed of accordingly. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)