Cri. Apln. No. 2534/11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2545 OF 2011 1. Savaleram s/o. Damu Bhandari, 2. Mandabai w/o. Savaleram Bhandari, 3. Ganesh s/o. Savaleram Bhandari, 4. Sudhir s/o. Savaleram Bhandari, 5. Eknath s/o. Chandrabhan Zarekar, 6. Chandrabhan s/o. Dadababa Zarekar, All R/o. Lohgaon, Tq. Newasa, Dist. Ahmednagar. ....Applicants. Versus The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent. Mr. N.B. Narawade, Advocate for applicant. Mr. B.J. Sonawane, APP for State/respondent. Mr. S.M. Salve, Advocate for original complainant. CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATED : 13th July, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed for anticipatory bail in Cr. No. 14/11 registered in Sonai Police Station, District Ahmednagar for offences punishable under sections 3 (1) (5), 3 (1) (15) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and also for section 7 (1) (d) of Protection of Civil Rights Act and for some offences under IPC like 504 Cri. Apln. No. 2534/11 2 etc. The APP has made papers of investigation available. Both the sides are heard. Advocate Shri. H.N. Salve is allowed to assist APP. 2. The crime is registered on the basis of report given by one Manisha Khode against the applicants. She has contended that her family consist of 27 persons and they have been occupying some portion of the land of the applicants, where they have made construction. It is contended that they are living there for more than 25 years and they have constructed houses on the land. It is the case of the complainant that present applicants are trying to evict them from that portion of the land. She has contended that in the past also they had come to their houses to drive them out of the house and complaints were given, but police did not take cognizance. She has described specific incident dated 30.4.2011 and she has contended that present applicants came to their houses with some Gunda persons and they gave beating to her and to other members of family and they gave abuses by taking the name of their caste as “Mangtya”. She has contended that threats of life were given and weapons like sticks, axe were used. She has also contended that the road which reaches them to their houses was closed by putting some sticks. 3. The advocate for applicant submitted that the land belongs to applicants and even in a suit (RCS No. 391/11) filed on 30.4.2011, relief of Cri. Apln. No. 2534/11 3 status quo was already given in their favour by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Newasa, a copy of which is produced by the applicants. The advocate submitted that as the Court gave some relief to them and as the complainant and her family members want to create some dispute, false report was given on 3.6.2011. He also submitted that a separate proceeding is also filed for quashing the FIR by filing Criminal application No. 2377/2011. This Court has granted stay to the proceedings of FIR No. II-14/2011 of Sonai Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar in that application. 4. The aforesaid material and the contentions show that the dispute between family of the complainant and family of applicants is different in nature and there is dispute over the piece of land and right to make construction. In view of these circumstances, there is clear probability that the real dispute is different and the sections of Atrocities Act are added to make the things grave and to pressurize the applicants. As the real dispute is different, this Court holds that anticipatory bail can be granted to the applicants. 5. So the ad-interim bail granted earlier is confirmed. These observations will not come in the way of Trial Court while deciding the case itself. Cri. Apln. No. 2534/11 4 [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] ssc/criapln2545.11