1 Farad Continuation Sheet No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3739 OF 2008 (DR.VINAYAK KASHIRAO INGALE & ANR.. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA) WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3740 OF 2008 (KISAN KASHIRAO INGALE & ANR.. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA) ________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ Shri Anil S. Mardikar, Advocate for applicant. Shri S.S.Doifode, A.P.P. for Respondent/ State. CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 26, 2008. 1. These are applications under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail by four persons, alleged to be involved in offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Sections 307, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.P.P. for respondent/ State and have also gone through reply filed by the respondent. 2 3. Bar contained in Section 18 of the SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for entertaining application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was sought to be invoked by the learned A.P.P.. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.P.P. seeks to mix up two separate incidents in order to invoke the provisions of SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 4. In the first incident, which took place on 01.09.2008 at 10.00 a.m. the applicants alleged to have addressed complainant as “DHEDGE, MAHARE” etc. but the complainant himself states that he did not pay any heed to these utterances. This incident was over and the parties went to their homes. In the evening at about 6.45 p.m. there was a fight between two groups. At that time there is no word in the F.I.R. that any caste based abuses were uttered by anyone. The applicants seek bail in respect of this incident dated 01.09.2008 at 18.45 hrs. The F.I.R. which has been filed on record shows time of incident as 18.45 hrs. Column No.3 of the F.I.R. cannot be read to mean that the incidents from morning till evening are being covered in the said report. In any case, since the complainant himself did not pay any heed to the abuses hurled in the morning no notice need be taken of those abuses. Therefore, bar of Section 18 3 of SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act would not apply to the present case. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant points out that on the same day because of assault launched on the applicant in Cri Appln.No.3740/2008 he had given report to the effect that the opponents had beaten up himself and his brother Narendra. Vinayak and Vijay, applicants in Cri. Appln. No. 3739 of 2008 are not involved in that assault. The allegations in F.I.R. in respect of the incident at 18.45 hrs. shows that the applicants Vinayak and Vijay had hit the complainant's son with wooden stalk. Considering the nature of the assault it would be appropriate if the applicants are admitted to bail and directed to co-operate with the investigation. 6. Both the applications are therefore, allowed. In the event of arrest in Crime No.61/2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Sections 307, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the applicants be released on their furnishing P.R.B. in Rs.Fifty Thousand each with solvent surety in the like amount on the condition that they shall report the Investigating Officer on 1st 4 December, 2008 at 10.00 a.m. and thereafter as and when required by the Investigating Officer. They shall cooperate with the investigation and shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. 7. Hamdast allowed. JUDGE RR.