The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authenticity and timing of allegations, specificity of the allegations, and presence of independent witnesses are crucial factors in determining the applicability of sec. 18 of the Atrocities Act and the grant of anticipatory bail.

JUDGMENT

PRAKASH D.NAIK, J. - This is an appeal under Sec. 14-A of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter refer to as Atrocities Act). The appellant has challenged the Order dtd. 14/11/2022 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sessions Court, Mumbai in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2420 of 2022.

2. The appellant is apprehending arrest in C.R. No. 571 of 2022 registered with Dongri Police Station for offences under Sec. 354-A, 504, 506, 509 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and Sec. 3(1)(W)(I)(II) of Atrocities Act.

3. The First Information Report (for short 'FIR') was registered at the instance of respondent No. 2. The brief allegations in the FIR are as follows :

i. The complainant belongs to Boudha community and Scheduled Caste. In the year 2012, she joined Habib Ismail Education Trust. She is working with Rahmatbai Habib Girls Primary School Division. She is teaching students of 1st to 4th standard. She worked as co-ordinator during Covid-19 period at Habib Hospital in month of June, July and August. She was directed to visit hospital wards and submit daily report of hospital to Mr. Javed Shroff (Appellant). Although she was working as a teacher, she was asked to do work at hospital and while she protested, the accused used to shout at her causing mental disturbance.

ii. In respect to her complaint dtd. 19/10/2022 and 22/10/2022 submitted to Dongari Police Station, she stated that while she had joined the school for employment, the Chairman of the trust was Mohib Ali Nasir. He continued to be Chairman till 2018-2019. Presently Mr. Javed Shroff is the Chairman of the trust. While Javed Shroff was Chairman, the complainant was appointed as temporary incharge from 15/8/2017. She continued to hold that post till 30/8/2022. The work assigned to complainant included issuing salary to teachers, supervising teachers, distribution of classes to teachers of 1st to 4th standard, performing administrative work. After she was removed from the said post, the said post has been assigned to Kaniz Nanjiyani. The complainant continues to work as teacher having responsibility of 2nd standard. There are 36 girls in her class. In the school there are above 280 girls studying in 1st to 4th standard. The school is aided by Government and Municipal Corporation.

iii. After performing work as incharge, the complainant tendered her resignation. The accused started threatening and pressurizing her to tender resignation of her job as teacher. While the complainant was working as incharge, she was made to wait under the garb of meeting till late in the night. The accused used to call her in the cabin and touch her inappropriately. The accused used to make What's app calls to her at odd hours which affected her family life. Although the complainant was the employee of school, the accused used to call her to Hotel Marine Plaza for meetings. The meetings were attended by Javed Shroff, Shaukatbhai Manekia, Charniya and Halani who were trustee of the said Trust. The accused used to shout at her in the presence of others in abusive language. She was called cheap and worthless lady in the institution. She was insulted. She was made to wait till 1 o'clock in the night for attending meetings in the school and hotel Marine Plaza. While she was working at Habib Hospital the accused abused her in the presence of people and doctors on the basis of her caste by referring to her as 'Dalit Ladki' and belonging to the lower caste. The accused used to make obscene gestures by looking at her and repeatedly demand sexual favours causing mental trauma to her. Her family life was destroyed. She had no option but to commit suicide. The accused used to pressurize her to leave the job. She was threatened. There is danger to her family from the accused.

4. The submissions of the learned Advocate for the appellant can be summarized as under :

a. The FIR is false. It is based on concocted version of the