JUDGMENT :

[Vibha Kankanwadi, J.]

1. Since the arguable points are made appeal is admitted.

2. Present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Atrocities Act”) by the original accused persons challenging order dated 09.11.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Newasa/Special Judge under S.C. & S.T. Act in Criminal Bail Application No.399/2022, thereby rejecting the application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the appellants.

3. Heard learned Advocate Mr. N.B. Narwade for appellants, learned APP Mr. A.M. Phule for respondent No.1 and learned Advocate Mr. S.D. Kotkar for respondent No.2.

4. It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the appellants that perusal of the First Information Report would show that the informant is the neighbour and she alleges that the appellant No.1 used to see towards her with ill eye or in such a manner which would outrage her modesty. But, at the same time, she says that she used to ignore the act of the appellant No.1. She found the appellant No.1 taking shooting from his mobile standing outside his house, when her husband was near the gate of their house, around 11.00 a.m. on 28.11.2021. According to her, her husband had made complaint against appellant No.1 to the landlord of the appellants, however, the said landlord had abused them on phone. She also states that the appellants had also abused in the name of caste to the informant, at that time. She then states that by taking shooting in his mobile the appellant No.1 was showing the same to the persons in the vicinity and he was defaming the informant and the family. Though there was harassment to them, they were ignoring it. She then states that on 21.03.2022, 22.03.2022 and 23.03.2022 appellant No.1 used to do such acts like whistling from the terrace, making noise with the help of utensils, making different kind of sounds and continuously blowing the reverse horn of the vehicle. Even the CCTV camera from the house of the appellants was placed in such manner so that the informant’s house and the activities can be captured in the same. She then states about the alleged incident that had allegedly taken place around 5.46 p.m. on 24.03.2022 which had happened with the Watchman of the informant. She had stated that the appellants had pelted stones on the informant, as a result of which she had sustained injury to her head, so also their Watchman Gangaram Devre had also sustained the injury. When she went to ask about the incident, at that time also the accused persons abused her in the name of caste and arrogantly told that if she lodges any report, then she would face dire consequences.

5. By apprising of these contents of the First Information Report the learned Advocate for the appellants submits that though the alleged last incident is stated to have taken place on 24.03.2022, the First Information Report has been lodged on 15.06.2022, therefore, there is apparent delay in lodging the report. He has also taken us through the other documents on record which show that the appellants had lodged complaint applications against the informant and her husband and it is going on since 02.06.2022. It is stated by the appellants in all these complaints that even the police persons had not taken cognizance of the offences, though they had gone to lodge the report and, therefore, they were required to file the complaint applications. The First Information Report that has been lodged by the informant is nothing but an act of vengeance. The informant and her husband are desirous of purchasing the house where the appellants are residing from the landlord, however, the landlord is not willing. The appellants have nothing to do with the said property. They are residing there on rent. They have no intention to commit any offence, however, the informant is misusing her caste. When the First Information Repo