1 Appln 4263-10 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4263 OF 2010 Guruprasad Ganpatrao Prabhu ..Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr.A.R.Pitale, Advocate, for the Applicant Mrs.P.P.Bhosale, APP, for the Respondent - State CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 30TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 P.C. . This is an application for anticipatory bail by a Head Master, who is alleged to have abused a teacher belonging to Scheduled Caste at a meeting referring to his caste. Therefore, he filed a complaint with the police station. The learned Counsel for the applicant states that the informant had mentioned his caste as Navboudha which is not included in Scheduled Caste. The learned Counsel for the applicant placed reliance on a Judgment of this Court in the matter of Pravin s/o.Shrimant Bhutekar Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., reported at 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 1223. 2 Appln 4263-10 The learned Counsel for the applicant states that there can be exception to the bar under Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (1989) for grant of anticipatory bail. I am afraid that the ground for making out exception which the learned Counsel canvasses falls in the realm of appreciation of evidence which will have to await trial. Whether the complaint is motivated, political or delayed all will have to be decided at the trial. 2. Therefore, Criminal Application is rejected. The Court before whom the applicant is produced would undoubtedly consider the nature of the allegation made and decide whether custodial interrogation is really necessary and decide the applicant's application in proper perspective. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)