1 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1655 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1655 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1655 OF 2009 1. Shri Sopan Pandurang Mohite, 2. Shri Satish Sopan Mohite, .. Applicants. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr Kuldeep S.patil, for the applicants. Mr Y.S.Shinde, APP, for the respondent. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 17.04.2009. DATED : 17.04.2009. DATED : 17.04.2009. P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.07 of 2009 of Roha Police Station, Raigad. The said crime has been registered against the applicants for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 504, 506 read with 34 of the IPC. 3. Mr Patil, learned counsel for the applicants, at the outset, invited my attention to the FIR and submitted that the complainant in the FIR has not stated that he belongs to either Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. He submitted that unless caste of 2 2 2 the complainant is specifically stated in the body of the FIR, the provisions of the Atrocities Act cannot be invoked against the applicants. He further submitted that even in the format of the FIR caste of the complainant has not been mentioned. In support of this proposition, he placed reliance upon the judgments of this court in Bai @ Laxmibai Nivratti Paul vs. State of Maharashtra, 2001 ALL M R (Cri) 219 and in Bibhishan s/o Maruti Anarse and Anr vs. state of Maharashtra & Ors, 2007 All M R (Cri) 194. Mr Shinde, learned APP, on the other hand, submitted that mentioning of the caste is not necessary in the FIR since it is a matter of investigation which the investigating agency, during investigation, can verify and proceed further . I have perused the Judgments cited by Mr Patil, learned counsel for the applicants, wherein the learned Judges of this court have taken a view that in the absence of mentioning of caste of the complainant, the police cannot investigate on the basis of the FIR. I do not find any reason to take a different view in that regard. In the present case, the complainant has not stated in the FIR as to which caste he belongs to. In the circumstances, prima facie, I am of the view that the offence under the Atrocities Act has not been made out and hence the 3 3 3 applicants are entitled to anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order. . In the event of arrest, the applicants be released on bail in the sum of Rs.10000/- each with one or two sureties to make up the said amount subject to the conditions as contained in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Further, the applicants are directed to report to the concerned police station every alternate day till 30.4.2009 between 10 am and 11 am and thereafter on first Saturday and third Saturday of every month between 10 am and 11 am for a period of 90 days or till filing of the chargesheet, whichever is earlier. . While passing this order I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial Court shall deal with the case uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. . The application is disposed of. (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.)