ABA-520-11.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.520 OF 2011 Sachin Ashok Wakse & Ors. ... Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents Mr. Sarang Satish Aradhye for the Applicants. Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, APP, for the Respondents. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 28 TH JUNE, 2011. P.C. : 1. By consent, heard finally. 2. The Applicants are the Accused Nos.9, 11, 12 and 14, respectively, in C.R. No.102 of 2011 registered at Pandharpur Police Station, Dist. Solapur. The said C.R. is in respect of offences punishable under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"), as also, the offences punishable under Sections 143 IPC, 147 IPC, 149 IPC, 323 IPC and 504 of the IPC. The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail. 3. It is contended by Mrs. Mulekar, the learned APP for the Respondents, that in view of the provisions of Section 18 of the said Act, the Application for ABA-520-11.sxw 2 Dixit anticipatory bail is not maintainable. According to her, the Applicants can very well surrender before the Police and seek regular bail. 4. Undoubtedly, once the ingredients of an offence punishable under the said Act are disclosed in relation to the person or persons named as accused, then the provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will not apply, and an application for anticipatory bail from such person or persons cannot be entertained. However, in the instant case, the contention of Mr. Aradhye, the learned Advocate for the Applicants, is that no ingredients of an offence punishable under the said Act are disclosed as against the present Applicants. In fact, his contention is that, the Applicants do not appear to have committed any offence, whatsoever, on a plain reading of the F.I.R. 5. I have gone through the F.I.R. I find that the Applicants and others had assembled in the Varanda of the Zilla Parishad School for the Palkhi Procession. In the incident, that took place there, which is the subject matter of the present case, the Applicants have not been given any role. No overt act has been attributed to any of the Applicants. They are simply named in the F.I.R. as the persons who were present and who along with others, jostled the First Informant. It is not possible to conclude that the ingredients of an offence punishable under the said Act are disclosed as against the present Applicants. 6. I am informed that all the other accused have been arrested and released on bail. 7. Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Applicants. ABA-520-11.sxw 3 Dixit 8. In the event of their arrest in C.R. No.101 of 2011 of Pandharpur City/Rural Police Station, Dist. Solapur, the Applicants be released on bail in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each, with one surety in like amount, on the condition to attend the Police Station everyday, between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., for a period of four days commencing from 30th June, 2011 and, thereafter, as and when required by the Investigating Officer. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]