AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Nikhil S. Kariel, J
Heard learned Advocate Mr.Yunus Malek on behalf of the appellants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Dabhi on behalf of respondent no.1-State. The First Informant is present in person and whereas he would request that the learned APP may make submissions on his behalf.
At the outset, learned Advocate Mr.Yunus Malek would not press the present appeal insofar as appellant Nos.2 and 4 are concerned, and whereas learned Advocate would submit that since no serious role has been attributed to appellant Nos.1 and 3 and being lady accused and further considering the fact that the main accused having been arrested by the Investigating Officer and having already been released on regular bail, this Court may consider the present appeal for releasing the appellant Nos.1 and 3 on anticipatory bail.
Having regard to the same, the present appeal is disposed of as withdrawn qua appellant Nos.2 and 4.
By way of this appeal filed under Section 14A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 read with Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 appellants No.1 and 3 pray for anticipatory bail in connection with F.I.R. No.11187008220236 of 2022 registered with Virpur Police Station, District Mahisagar on 4/5.7.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 504, 506(2), 143, 144, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 135 of G.P. Act, and also under Sections 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Learned Advocate Mr.Yunus Malek for the appellants No.1 and 3 would submit that the first informant has levelled frivolous allegations against the appellants and no specific role has been attributed to the appellants. Learned Advocate would submit that the present appellants are lady accused, and have no antecedents of any criminal activities. Learned Advocate would submit that the present case has been filed to settle the score, and therefore, this Court may release the present appellants on anticipatory bail. Learned Advocate for the appellants on instructions states that the appellants are ready and willing to abide by all the conditions including imposition of conditions with regard to powers of Investigating Agency to file an application before the competent Court for their remand. Learned Advocate would further submit that upon filing of such application by the Investigating Agency, the right of appellants-accused to oppose such application on merits may be kept open.
This appeal as well as submissions of learned Advocate Mr.Malek have been vehemently opposed by learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Dabhi appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned APP would submit that considering the seriousness of the matter, the appellants may not be released on anticipatory bail by this Court.
Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and having perused the documents given by learned Advocates for the parties as well as documents provided by the learned APP, the following relevant aspects are considered by this Court:
It appears that the serious role of having used caste related abuses as well as attempting to assault etc., are co-relatable with other accused, other than appellants No.1 and 3;
It also appears that while the parties have some civil dispute and whereas the parties also appear to have entered into an agreement at the behest of the local villagers dated 15.7.2020 and whereas it prima facie appears that the accused side had not complied with their part of undertaking;
It also appears that the accused No1 had been arrested by the Investigating Officer and later on released on regular bail;
This Court has also considered that the appellants No.1 and 3 are lady accused, without any antecedents.
Having regard to the same and considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in (2011)1 SCC 694 , this Court is inclined to consider this appeal.
In the result, the present appeal is allowed qua appellants No.1 and 3 by directing that in the event of appellants herein being arrested pursuant to the F.I.R. No.11187008220236 of 2022 registered with Virpur Police Station, District Mahisagar, the appellants shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with one surety of like amount each, on the following conditions:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at the concerned Police Station on 29.09.2022 between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.;
(c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the Police;
(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the Investigating Officer and the Court concerned and shall not change their residence till the final disposal of the case or till further orders;
(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and, if having passports shall surrender the same before the Trial Court within a week.
Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to file an application for police remand of the appellants to the competent Magistrate, if he thinks it just and proper and learned Magistrate would decide it on merits. The appellants shall remain present before the learned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be directed by the learned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to treat the accused in the judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining application of the prosecution for police remand. This is, however, without prejudice to the right of the accused to seek stay against an order of remand, if ultimately granted, and the power of the learned Magistrate to consider such a request in accordance with law. It is clarified that the appellants, even if, remanded to the police custody, upon completion of such period of police remand, shall be set free immediately, subject to other conditions of this anticipatory bail order.
At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court while enlarging the appellants on bail. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Direct service is permitted.