1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4393 OF 2009 1. Balasaheb Anna Patil 2. Sunil Anna Patil 3. Krushnadeo Murlidhar Halnoor 4. Baliram Manohar Halnoor 5. Girjappa Chandrabhan Patil 6. Shamrao Anna Patil 7. Anna Vitthal Patil 8. Kundalik Vitthal Gavade 9. Mahadeo Bhujanga Waghmode 10.Murlidhar Manohar Halnoor ....Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent ----- Mr.J.D. Mane for Applicants Mrs. M.R. Tidke -APP for the State. ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 5TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants and the learned APP for the State. 2. The Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with an offence which is registered vide C.R. No.292 of 2009 with Mohol Police Station for the offences punishable under sections 395, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 1 7(1)(d) and 10 of Protection of Civil Rights Act and section 3(1) (10), 6 of S.C.S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Interim bail has been granted by this Court by order dated 30th September, 2009. 3. The Complainant Ashok Gena Saravade has lodged a complaint on 5.8.2009 in which he has alleged that his son Prashant had gone to the play ground situated near the school to play cricket. However, one Dada Dharma Waghmode and Bandu Patil had prevented him from playing cricket. The Complainant, therefore went near the S.T. Stand, at that place the Applicants were present there and they had sword, sticks and cycle chain in their hand. It is alleged that when the Complainant questioned why his son was not allowed to play on the school play ground, he was surrounded by the Applicants and he was abused by name of his caste and he was assaulted by all these Applicants. 4. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants submitted that in fact this complaint has been filed as a counter blast and on the other hand, the Applicants had filed a complaint prior to this complaint in which they had stated that the said Ashok Gena Saravade had assaulted the father and son of the Applicant No.1 and they had filed a complaint vide C.R. No.294 of 2009. He submitted that injury certificate produced by the prosecution clearly 1 revealed that there were no external injuries seen over the body of the Complainant. He submitted that the Applicants, therefore, were falsely implicated in the present case. 5. I have perused the FIR and injury certificate which clearly states that no external injuries were seen on the person of the Complainant. Perusal of the complaint, prima facie, does not disclose the offence under the provisions of the Atrocities Act or Protection of Civil Rights Act. This Court in the case of Ramchandra Govindrao Watkar reported in 1995(2) MLJ 669, has held that if the FIR has not disclosed the ingredients of the offence punishable under the Prevention of Atrocities Act, an application for anticipatory bail is maintainable. Since prima facie perusal of the Complaint does not disclose the ingredients of the offence punishable under the Prevention of the Atrocities Act, in my view, the Applicants are entitled to apply for anticipatory bail. The dispute essentially had arisen out of a trivial dispute between the Complainant and cross complaints have been filed by both the parties. Admittedly no person has been injured in the said incident. The present complaint as a counter blast of the complaint filed by the Applicant No.1. Under these circumstances, therefore, custodial interrogation of the Applicants is not necessary. 1 Some of the Applicants are senior citizens. The Applicant No.7 is 80 years old. Applicant No.10 is 70 years old. Applicant No.4 is 60 years old. In view of this, all the Applicants are entitled to be released on bail in the event of their arrest. 6. Interim order passed by this Court dated 30th September, 2009 is confirmed. 7. Application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)