..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3177 OF 2008 Nanda Yashwant Patil and 47 others. ..Applicants. Versus The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. .... Mr.Shreekant V. Gavand Adv. for the applicants. Mr.H.J.Dedia, APP, for the State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 23rd September,2008. DATED : 23rd September,2008. DATED : 23rd September,2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the Applicants and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.114 of 2008 of Pen police station, District : Raigad. The said case is under Sections 3(1)(v), (x) & (xv) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. The case of the complainant is that he wanted to sell 45 acres of agricultural land to some person in Mumbai. The applicants who are the ..(2).. residents of the same village i.e. Ambivali village did not want him to sell the said land to an outsider and they wanted the complainant to sell the land to them. 4. I have perused the said complaint. In the complaint, there is no reference to the caste of any of the accused persons. It is noticed that the complainant has not stated anywhere that the accused persons do not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. 5. Useful reference can be made to the decision of this Court in the case of Ashabala Ashabala Ashabala Ganeshrao Khote & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra Ganeshrao Khote & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra Ganeshrao Khote & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 1992(2) Mh.L.J. page-36 1992(2) Mh.L.J. page-36 1992(2) Mh.L.J. page-36, wherein this Court has held that Section 3 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, contemplates that the prosecution must establish that accused was not member of scheduled caste or scheduled tribe and the person aggrieved was the member of scheduled caste or scheduled tribe. This is the important ingredient to establish offence under Section 3 of the Act. There must be specific material with respect to ..(3).. both these aspects. 6. In the present case, the complainant in the FIR has not stated the caste of the accused persons. To attract the provisions of Section 3 of the Act, the complainant has not only to reveal the caste of the person who is sought to be insulted or intimidated or humiliated but he should also disclose that such person belongs to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and simultaneously the complaint should also reveal that the person who is accused of commission of such offence does not belong either to a Scheduled caste or to a Scheduled Tribe. It is only when the accusation with an intention to insult or intimidate or to humiliate has been made by a person not belonging either to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and addressed to the person belonging to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, only in that case, he could be said to have committed an offence under section 3 of the said Act and not otherwise. Obviously, therefore, if the complaint does not disclose that the accused person do not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, it would not disclose an offence ..(4).. in terms of the said sections. 7. In the present case, the complaint is totally silent about the caste of the accused persons. 8. Looking to the above facts, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. 9. In the event of arrest, the applicants to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rs.Fifteen Thousand Only) each with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. The applicants shall not enter into village Ambivali or Pen area till 8th October, 2008. After 8th October, 2008, the applicants shall report to Pen Police Station, District : Raigad once in a month, till conclusion of the trial. 10. Criminal Application is disposed of accordingly. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)