AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Shri M. N. Ali, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Mrs. H. S. Dhande, learned APP appearing for respondent No.1 and Shri S. R. Sayare, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 at length.
Admit. With the consent of both sides, the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission.
By the present appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), the appellants take exception to the judgment and order dated 04/09/2026 passed by the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge-1, Pusad in Criminal Bail Application No.303/2026, whereby declined to enlarge the appellants / accused on anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.281/2026 registered with Police Station, Khandala, Dist. Yavatmal for the offences punishable under Sections 352 and 351(2)(3) r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
On the face of record, it prima facie appears that Crime No.281/2026 was registered with Khandala Police Station on the basis of FIR lodged by the respondent No.2 / informant alleging that on 25/06/2026 at about 10.30 a.m., he along with his son were carrying out agricultural operations in their field and at that time, their neighbouring agriculturist Sheikh Rehmatulla Sheikh Amir was uprooting the cement poles, which were erected by the informant at Bund of field and when the informant asked him as to why he is removing the poles, the present appellants who are sons of neighbouring agriculturist arrived at the spot. Both of them allegedly abused the informant by referring to his caste in chorus and attempted to assault with the help of sticks, they also tried to assault and abused in filthy language. The informant further alleged that the present appellants, his father and others also threatened to kill him and also abused him by referring to his caste.
After registration of the crime, the present appellants were approached before the learned Sessions Court, Pusad by filing an application seeking anticipatory bail. On 04/09/2026, the learned Sessions Court passed the impugned order and declined to enlarge the appellants / accused on anticipatory bail on the ground that the accused are absconding and there is bar under Section 18 of the Atrocities Act to enlarge the appellants on anticipatory bail.
The Investigating Officer has already filed a charge sheet against the present appellants under Section 335 of the BNSS, 2023.
On perusal of the record, it prima facie appears that Respondent No. 2/Informant has made an omnibus allegation that the appellant and others, in chorus, abused him by referring to his caste. However, the FIR does not specify the particular casteist slur allegedly uttered by the appellant or the other accused. It is well known that in chorus, one and the same words cannot be uttered by the accused at a time. Not only this, but the present respondent No.2 has already filed an application with the Revenue Authorities for measurement of his land and after issuing notice, the hearing was fixed on 24/06/2026, which was postponed for 30/06/2026. Therefore, it appears that the existence of dispute between the appellants, their fathers and the respondent No.2 is on account of boundary of the field.
Further, considering the contents of FIR, it does not appear that the appellants abused the respondent No.2 in his caste in public view, hence, as per law laid down in cases of Kiran Vrs. Rajkumar Jivraj Jain and others, AIR 2025 SC 4083 and Karuppudayar Vs. State Rep. By The Deputy Superintendent of Police & Ors, 2025(2) CGLJ 316 , the provisions of Section 18 of the Atrocities Act, no bar is created to enlarge the appellants / accused on anticipatory bail.
However, the learned Trial Court passed the impugned order by misconstruing the provisions of law and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside and the appellants / accused are entitled to release on anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.281/2026 registered with Khandala Police Station, Dist. Yavatmal for the offences punishable under Sections 352 and 351(2)(3) r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. Accordingly, I am inclined to allow the appeal and proceed to pass the following order :
ORDER
i] The appeal is allowed.
ii] The impugned order dated 04/09/2026 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.303/2026 by the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge-1, Pusad, Dist. Yavatmal is hereby quashed and set aside.
iii] In the event of arrest, Appellant No.1 – Sheikh Junaid Sheikh Rehmatulla and the Appellant No.2 – Sheikh Aeraj Sheikh Rehmatulla be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.281/2026 registered on 25/06/2026 with Police Station, Khandala, Dist. Yavatmal for the offences punishable under Sections 352 and 351(2)(3) r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.50,000/- each with two solvent sureties each in the like amount.
iv] The appellants / accused shall attend the concerned Investigating Officer on every Monday in between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. and they shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer for conclusion of the trial for a period of two months.
v] Both the appellants shall furnish two Cell Numbers of their close relatives with the Investigating Officer.
vi] The appellants shall regularly appear before the learned Trial Court and they shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses by any other mode.
The appeal stands disposed of.
The fees of the appointed counsel be quantified and paid as per the rules.