- 1 - form rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.670 OF 2011 Fr.Ajit Ghosal Tellis .. Applicant vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents Mr.E.B.Dixit i.b Mr.P.R.Yadav for Applicant Ms.P.P.Shinde APP for State CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J DATE: 17 th August 2011 P.C. 1. The Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Crime No.84 of 2011 registered at Ghatkopar police station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under sections 384,385,386,506, 509 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and the learned APP. Perused the police papers. The present Applicant is a trustee of Fatima High School, which is a Christian school. Other four accused are Principal and staff members of that school. The school runs a primary and secondary section for the Academic year 2011-2012 on-line - 2 - form admissions were commenced for the Junior KG in the primary section. One Latishan Khairnar and her husband Youraj had also submitted an Application for admission for their child in Junior KG. According to them, the Complainant Latishan is a Christian and therefore priority should have been given in admission to her child. However, when on-line results were declared, her child was not shown among the candidates who were given admission. When she, along with her husband, approached the management, the accused Father Joseph, Father Albert and one more person who is said to be present applicant Father Ajit Tellis were present. After she made her grievance about admission of her child, she was put some questions about her religion and practicing Christian religion. In her report lodged at the police station on 28.2.2011 complainant Latishan Khairnar alleged that a donation of Rs.1.5 lac was demanded. On this her husband offered to arrange for a donation of Rs.20,000/- to Rs. 25,000/-. The said Fathers insulted them and - 3 - form Father Albert asked them to get out. Not only that Father Albert allegedly called the Complainant as "Nalayak kutri" or bitch and said that he would spit on her. In view of this report lodged by Latishan Crime No.84 of 2011 was registered under section 509 IPC. 3. An Offence under section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is committed by a person whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both. Intention to insult the modesty of a woman is main ingredient of the offence under section 509 of Indian Penal Code. Whether on the basis of the report lodged by Latishan Khairnar an offence under section - 4 - form 509 Indian Penal Code is made out or not is a question which I need not consider at this stage. That may be left to the Court before whom the matter may go. 4. The fact remains that there was no allegation of any threats of injury or otherwise whereby any attempt was made to extort money from the Complainant. It appears that after having registered an offence under section 509 Indian Penal Code statements of Sanjay Chalke , Jitendra Parkhe and Yuvraj Khairnar were recorded. Supplementary statement of Latishan Khairnar was also recorded. Sanjay Chalke alleged that for admission of his child an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- was demanded by Father Joseph and that he had actually paid amount was Rs.35,000/-and got admission. Jitendra Parkhe alleged that donation of Rs.1,00,000/- was demanded by Fr.Anil in presence of Father Joseph and Father Ajit. Whether the said Jitendra Parkhe made any payment or not and whether his child was given admission or not, is - 5 - form not known. However, those statement also do not disclose that anybody had given any threats to extort money from them. 5. It appears that after recording those statements sections 384, 385 and 506 of Indian Penal, Code and possibly section 386 were added. Offences under section 384 and 386 of INdian Penal Code are non bailable. The learned APP on instructions makes a statement that sections 384, 385, and 506 were added as per directions given by Police Inspector Kothmire of Ghatkopar police station. Learned counsel for the Applicant contends that these sections were added at the behest of one Jitendra Parkhe who happens to be worker of Nationalist Congress Party. 6. After perusal of the complaint and record, it appears that initially an offence was registered only under section 509 of Indian Penal Code on the basis of report of Latishan Khairnar and that offence is bailable under law. - 6 - form Not a single witness disclosed any fact on the basis of which sections 384, 385,386 or 506 of Indian Penal Code could be invoked. It appears that these sections were invoked only to see that the accused persons are not granted bail. According to the learned counsel for the Applicant, Primary section of Fatima High School is un-aided while secondary section gets grant- in-aid. Whether the management can demand and accept donations or capitation fee for the un- aided school is a question which needs to be looked into. Even if they cannot make such a demand or accept such a donation or capitation fee an action may be taken against the management under the relevant provisions of law but, certainly sections 384, 385,386 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be invoked. 7. In view of the fact that these sections were invoked as per directions given by Police Inspector Kothmire, as informed by the learned APP on the basis of the instructions received, by him, in my opinion, matter needs to be looked - 7 - form into by higher authorities. Anyhow out of four accused persons, who are available in India, three accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail. In view of the circumstances of the case, in my opinion, the present Applicant also deserves to be granted anticipatory bail. 8. Therefore, in the event of arrest in C.R.No.84 of 2011 for offences under sections 384, 385,386 and 506 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code, the Applicant be released on bail on his executing P.R.bond of Rs.10,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount with the condition that as and when required, he shall attend Ghatkopar police station, Mumbai for the purpose of interrogation and shall fully cooperate in the investigation and shall not misuse the bail. 9. A copy of this order be forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai to look into the matter as to how and in what circumstances - 8 - form Police Inspector Kothmire directed to add sections 384, 385,386 and 506 of the Indian penal Code for which there was no material and to take appropriate action as per law. J.H.BHATIA, J