1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1533 OF 2010 Sadashiv s/o Dhondiba Suryawanshi ...Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, through P.S. Hadgaon, Tq.Hadgaon, District Nanded ...Respondent ..... Shri G.P.Shinde, advocate for the applicant Shri D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 28th April, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Shri G.P.Shinde, advocate for the applicant and Shri D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for the respondent. 2 This is an application for anticipatory bail preferred by applicant herein apprehending his arrest under CR No. 14 of 2010, registered at Hadgaon police station, District Nanded, for the offence 2 punishable under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the complaint lodged by complainant, namely Santosh Ghanasyam Ghungarrao on 17.3.2010 in respect of the alleged occurrence of the incident on 15.3.2010. It is alleged that on 15.3.2010 at about 10.30 p.m., the complainant was standing in front of his house and the applicant namely Sadanand Dhondiba Suryawanshi and Sudarshan Dhondiba Suryawanshi arrived there and abused him that, “Maharde Dherde Tumhi Lay Majalat Ka Tu Gharachya Baher Nigh Nasata Tula Fukun Dein”. 4 Learned counsel for the applicant invited my attention to the material aspect that the contents of said complaint do not spell out that complainant is a member of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe although it is stated in the said complaint that the applicant and Sudarshan Suryawanshi belong to Maratha community. Hence, in view of the said position, the application of Section 3 (1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 would apparently be in doldrums, and therefore, consequently the bar under Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant would be futile. Besides that, learned counsel for the 3 applicant pointed out that name of the applicant is Sadashiv Dhondiba Suryawanshi; whereas name reflected in the complaint is Sadanand Dhondiba Suryawanshi. Moreover, whether incident occurred was within the public view or not is also under suspicion. 5 Hence, considering the afore said lacunae, present application is required to be allowed. 6 In the result, present application is allowed and it is directed it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with CR No. 14 of 2010, registered at Hadgaon police station, District Nanded, he be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- and on executing P.R. bond in the like amount, on the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required on written intimation and shall cooperate in the investigation. (ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence upon the witnesses directly or indirectly. 7 Needles to state that the afore said order shall be in force till filing of the charge sheet. 4 8 The above observations are prima facie observations and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap1533.10