(1) CRI.APP. 3780.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3780 OF 2010 1. Dattatraya Raosaheb Vanave Age : 22 years, Occu.: Agri., 2. Vitthal Bharat Vanave, Age : 23 years, Occu.: Agri., 3. Balasaheb Rambhau Vanave, Age : 40 years, Occu.: Agri., 4. Bharat Santu Vanave, Age : 50 years, Occu.: Agri., 5. Shantaram Baban Vanave, Age : 32 years, Occu.: Agri., 6. Balasaheb Baban Vanave, Age : 24 years, Occu.: Agri., 7. Baban Santu Vanave, Age : 62 years, Occu.: Agri., 8. Kisan Rabhaji Vanave, Age : 56 years, Occu.: Agri., 9. Deoram Dada Nagare, Age : 40 years, Occu.: Agri., 10. Munir Yunus Shaikh, Age : 25 years, Occu.: Agri., 11. Tanaji Bhaurao Nagare, Age : 28 years, Occu.: Agri., 12. Shankar Haribhau Gite, Age : 20 years, Occu.: Agri., 13. Bhausaheb Kondaji Nagare, Age : 65 years, Occu.: Agri., (2) CRI.APP. 3780.2010 14. Baban Kondaji Nagare, Age : 35 years, Occu.: Agri., 15. Babasaheb Dnyandeo Nagare, Age : 22 years, Occu.: Agri., 16. Dattu Ramdas Nagare, Age : 25 years, Occu.: Agri., 17. Yadav Laxman Nagare, Age : 50 years, Occu.: Agri., 18. Ankush Yadav Nagare, Age : 25 years, Occu.: Agri., 19. Rajendra Vasant Vanave, Age : 22 years, Occu.: Agri., 20. Nagma Ishaak Shaikh, Age : 32 years, Occu.: Agri., 21. Sanjay Bhikaji Vanave, Age : 27 years, Occu.: Agri., 22. Anna @ Anil Popat Dolzake Age : 25 years, Occu.: Agri., 23. Jagannath Dada Nagare, Age : 42 years, Occu.: Agri., 24. Alka Shantaram Vanave, Age : 25 years, Occu.: Agri., 25. Mandabai Baban Nagare, Age : 32 years, Occu.: Agri., 26. Arjun @ Bhika Bharat Vanave, Age : 27 years, Occu.: Agri., All R/o. Hiwargaon Pathar, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar .. Applicants VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra (Copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad) (3) CRI.APP. 3780.2010 2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar .. Respondents ... Mr. R.N. Dhorde, Advocate h/f. Mr. Vikram R. Dhorde, Advocate for the Applicants Mr. N.H. Borade, APP for the respondent-State ... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 28TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. By this Application, the applicants are seeking anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The incident giving rise to filing of the FIR is said to have taken place on 4th September, 2010 at about 9.00 am. It appears that informant Navnath Misal is from the group of the candidates who were defeated from the Village Panchayat elections. There was some religious ceremony in a temple of Maruti on 2.9.2010 which was followed by meals. It appears that Ratan Chandar Misal, who is relative of the informant Navnath, attempted to enter the Maruti (4) CRI.APP. 3780.2010 temple with chappals which was objected to by one Bharat Wanave. On that ground, there was some fracas between the two groups and therefore, on 4.9.2010 a meeting was called in front of the Maruti temple for the purpose of settlement of that dispute. According to the informant, he was called to attend the meeting. He declined to attend the meeting and went to his house. It is alleged that the applicants barged in that house and assaulted the informant by means of stones, stick etc. At that time members of the group of applicants also abused the informant and his relatives and stated that the Maharade/Dhedge had become more arrogant. The informant therefore felt insulted and went to the Police Station. He lodged FIR. 3. Having heard learned Advocate for the applicants and learned APP and on perusal of the investigation papers, it prima facie appears that informant Navnath did not receive any visible injury during the course of the incident. Though medico- legal certificates prima facie indicates that some of (5) CRI.APP. 3780.2010 the injured had received certain injuries yet, they were found to be of simple nature. 4. It appears that a counter complaint was lodged by applicant no.14 Baban and, thereafter the FIR was lodged by said Navnath. The recitals of the FIR lodged by said Navnath would show that vague allegations are made in respect of the abuses addressed by the group members who had entered the house. It is also clear that the alleged incident is said to have taken place inside the house of the informant and therefore it was not within the public view that such kind of insult was caused to the informant for the reason that he is member of scheduled caste. In other words, prima facie, section 3(1)(x) and (xi) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 may not be attracted on the prima facie evaluation of the recitals of the FIR. It is probable therefore that there was animosity between two groups and there were certain disputes between them which probably gave rise to the incident in question. (6) CRI.APP. 3780.2010 5. The learned APP states that the applicant no.2 Vitthal, applicant no.18 Ankush and applicant no.22 Anna alias Anil have been arrested. The Application is therefore not pressed to the extent of the said applicants by learned Advocate for the applicants. Needless to say the Application stands dismissed to the extent of applicant no.2 Vitthal, applicant no.18 Ankush and applicant no.22 Anna alias Anil. So far as the remaining applicants are concerned, in view of the foregoing discussion, their arrest is not eminent and required to be effected for effective investigation. 6. In the result, the Application is partly allowed to the extent of applicant no.1-Dattatraya, no.3-Balasaheb, no.4-Bharat, no.5-Shantaram, no.6- Balasaheb, no.7-Baban, no.8-Kisan, no.9-Deoram, no. 10-Munir, no.11-Tanaji, no.12-Shankar, no.13- Bhausaheb, no.14-Baban, no.15-Babasaheb, no.16-Dattu, no.17-Yadav, no.19-Rajendra, no.20-Nagma, no.21- Sanjay, no.23-Jagannath, no.24-Alka, no.25-Mandabai and no.26-Arjun. They shall be released on bail, in (7) CRI.APP. 3780.2010 the event of their arrest, on furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) each alongwith one surety each to be furnished before the Arresting Officer and on condition that they shall attend the concerned Police Station on Tuesday and Saturday between 10.00 am. to 2.00 pm. for four consecutive days henceforth and to co-operate the Investigation Officer during the course of interrogation/investigation. Any breach of such condition will entail cancellation of the anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail will come to end on filing of the chargesheet/final report. Application disposed of accordingly. Sd/- [V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp