Cri. Apln. No. 2026/11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2026 OF 2011 1. Narayan s/o. Kisan Fate, 2. Balasaheb s/o. Kisan Fate, 3. Madan s/o. Narayan Fate, 4. Avinash s/o. Balasaheb Fate, 5. Amol s/o. Balasaheb Fate, All R/o. Ghodegaon, Tq. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar. ....Applicants. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ....Respondents. Mr. V.D. Sapkal, Advocate for applicants. Mr. G.R. Ingole, APP for respondents. Mr. N.V. Gaware, Advocate for original complainant. CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATED : 7th June, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed under section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code in Cr. No. 100/2011 registered with Shrigonda Police Station, District Ahmednagar. The crime is registered for offences under sections Cri. Apln. No. 2026/11 2 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and for other offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code. Papers of investigation were made available and both the sides are heard. 2. Allegations are made in the report given by one Ankush Bajirao Tupe that all the applicants were illegally removing trees from Government land and they were preparing road in Government land (Gat No. 105 from village Ghodegaon). It is contended that he engaged Gangaram Mache to do the video shooting of illegal activities of applicants as Gangaram Mache wanted to produce the material before the District Magistrate for proving the illegal activities of the applicant. It is contended that when he was doing the work of video shooting , all the applicants rushed at him and they snatched video camera and they also assaulted him. Allegations are made that the applicants abuses Gangaram Mache by taking the name of his caste "Mang". 3. In the police papers, there are statements of eye witnesses in support of allegations made by the complainant. There is injury certificate dated 27.4.2011 to show that he had sustained atleast three injuries like CLW and contusion on that day. At this stage, it is not disputed that the complainant belongs to scheduled caste "Mang" and applicants do not belong to such caste. Cri. Apln. No. 2026/11 3 4. Some material is produced by the applicants to show that there are enmical terms with the persons like Gangaram Mache and Balasaheb Fate. Balasaheb Fate is said to be relative of the applicants. Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 are real brothers inter-se. Applicant No. 3 is a son of applicant No. 1 and applicant Nos. 4 and 5 are sons of applicant No. 2. It is the case of the applicants that they had taken some steps against Mache and said Fate and due to that they have joined hands and they instigated the complainant to give false report against them. Some record is produced to show that application was made against said Fate that he had made encroachment over land Gat No. 105 and that was causing obstruction to public way. Record is produced to show that applications were made against Gangaram Mache, who was the Chairman of one co-operative society, to show that he had misappropriated the money of society and he had created some false record of loan transaction. Record is produced to show that the proceedings filed against applicants under section 101 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act by Gangaram Mache were rejected. On the basis of this contention, it was submitted that allegations made against them are false and almost all male members of family are roped in. 5. The original complainant has produced some record to show that revenue authority has issued notice to applicant No. 2 Balasaheb Kisan Cri. Apln. No. 2026/11 4 Fate for recovery of amount in respect of excavation of minerals illegally. The amount is more than Rs. 1.79 Crore. It was submitted that applicants are working in such a way that they do not care of law and they are ready to go to any extent. It was submitted that they were illegally trying to create road in Government land and that is why incident took place. 6. The police papers show that allegations are mainly against Balasaheb Kisan Fate and his brother Narayan Kisan Fate. In the FIR it is mentioned that abuses were first given by Balasaheb and Narayan. There are also allegations that other applicants also rushed at him and they also gave abuses by taking the name of caste. Applicant Nos. 3 to 5 are the issues of applicant Nos. 1 and 2. The dispute is mainly between Balsaheb Kisan Fate on one side and Gangaram Mache and other Fate, who is the relative of the applicants. The material collected by police is sufficient to make out prima facie case that some incident took place in land Gat No. 105 on that day and the complainant was man handled. So there is no possibility of false implication atleast in respect of Balasaheb Kisan Fate. Though there is some material against Narayan Kisan Fate and remaining applicants i.e. applicant Nos. 3 to 5, the relief of anticipatory bail can be given to them as the dispute is mainly between Balasaheb Kisan Fate and the aforesaid two persons. The presence of Balasaheb Kisan Fate on the spot at the relevant time cannot be disputed at this stage. So in spite of the bar of section 18 of the SC & ST Cri. Apln. No. 2026/11 5 (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the relief can be granted to applicant Nos. 1, 3 to 5. But relief cannot be granted to applicant No. 2. 7. It was submitted for original complainant that the copy of printed FIR produced with the petition does not tally with the original FIR. In original report, it is mentioned that applicant Nos. 1 and 2 were carrying sticks. Copy of the original FIR is produced by the original complainant. In spite of this circumstance, the relief cannot be refused to Narayan. So the order. (1) Application of applicant No. 2 Balasaheb Kisan Fate stands rejected. (2) Application of applicant No. 1 Narayan Kisan Fate, applicant No. 3 Madan Narayan Fate, applicant No. 4 Avinash Balasaheb Fate and applicant No. 5 Amol Balasaheb Fate stands allowed. (3) In case of arrest of applicant Nos. 1, 3 to 5 in Cr. No. 100/2011 registered with Shrigonda Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar for the offence under sections 3(1)(x) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under sections 323, 504, 506, 427, 143, 147 of IPC, they are to be released on furnishing PR and SB of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) each. They are not to tamper with prosecution evidence. They are not to commit similar offence. Cri. Apln. No. 2026/11 6 [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] ssc/criapln2026.11