1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2279 OF 2009 1. Kamalbai W/o.Chandrasen Gore, Age-40 years, Occu-Agriculture and Household, R/o.Naigaon, Tq.Kallam, Dist. Osmanabad 2. Chandrasen S/o.Baburao Gore, Age-49 years, Occu-Teacher, R/o.Naigaon, Tq. Kallam, Dist. Osmanabad APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Police Inspector, Police Station, Siradhon, Tq.Kalam, Dist. Osmanabad 2. Jayashree W/o.Shivaji Chavan, Age-40 years, Occu-Agriculture, R/o.Naigaon, Tq.Kallam, Dist. Osmanabad. RESPONDENTS Miss.Vaishali Deshmukh, h/f. Mr.V.D.Salunkhe, learned counsel for applicants. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for respondent no.1. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 08/12/2009 PER COURT : 2 1. By the present application, the applicants have approached this Court for their release on anticipatory bail in connection with CR No.11/2009 registered at Siradhon Police Station, for an offence punishable u/s. 294, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC and u/s. 3(1)(x) of The atrocities Act. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicants followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for State. Also perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. During the course of submissions across the bar, my attention is drawn towards the complaint lodged on 26/06/2009 and on that basis, an offence was registered in Siradhon Police Station vide CR No.11/2009. By pointing out the contents and the allegations in the complaint, only 2 points are urged that the alleged place of offence can not be termed as a public place and it also can not be said that this abuse on the basis of the caste of complainant is to the knowledge of the public at large which are the requisite ingredients to come across the bar of section 18 which speaks for no anticipatory bail in the cases of Atrocities Act. 4. The application is opposed by learned APP appearing for the State by pointing out the panchnama of spot. According to him, the alleged incident took place in the field which is accessible to the public at large. 3 5. Considering these submissions across the bar, accessible to the public at large and a public place are two different aspects. As per the allegations made in the complaint, the alleged incident is not witnessed by the public at large and it took place in her field, and her field is her private property and can not be said to be the public property which is accessible for public at large. In the premise, an exception is made out for grant of anticipatory bail as provided u/s. 18 of The Atrocities Act. A case made out to enlarge the applicant accused on anticipatory bail. Hence following is the order : O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. The interim protection already granted to the applicant is hereby confirmed and to remain in force for the period of 4 weeks. Within meantime, the applicant may apply for regular bail. 3. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/DEC 2009/cri.appl.2279-09