Back
2022 Supreme(Bom) 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Revati Mohite Dere, V.G.Bisht, JJ.
Jaykumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 506 of 2022
Decided On : 14-06-2022
Ashok P.Mundargi, Advocate, Sanjeev Kadam, Advocate, Vishwajeet Mohite, Advocate, Siddharth Karpe, Advocate, S.V.Gavand, Advocate, Manoj Mohite, Advocate, Vaibhav Gaikwad, Advocate
Prima facie evidence of involvement in the alleged offences, the specific legal provisions of the SC ST Act, and the bar under Ss. 18 and 18A of the Act influenced the court's decision.
Headnote:
SC ST Act - Criminal Appeal - Sec. 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Ss. 193, 199, 200, 419, 420, 423, 205, 209, 467, 426, 465, 468, 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code - Ss. 3(1) (f) and 3 (1) (g) of the SC ST Act
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, President of an educational institution, is accused of creating forged documents to obtain an approach road to the institute, including impersonating a deceased person and submitting false information.
Finding of the Court:
The court found prima facie evidence of the appellant's involvement in the alleged offences, including giving false information causing injury to a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The court also noted the bar under Ss. 18 and 18A of the SC ST Act, and denied the appellant's prayer for anticipatory bail.
Issues: Forgery, impersonation, giving false information, and the applicability of Ss. 18 and 18A of the SC ST Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the prima facie evidence of the appellant's involvement in the alleged offences, the specific legal provisions of the SC ST Act, and the bar under Ss. 18 and 18A of the Act.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was dismissed, and the court discharged the rule, emphasizing that the observations made were prima facie and the trial court should decide the case on its own merits.
JUDGMENT
V.G.BISHT,J. - Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties and is taken up for final disposal.
3. This criminal appeal is preferred under Sec. 14 -A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, "the SC ST Act") against the order dtd. 6/5/2022 passed below Exhibit 1 in Criminal Bail Application No. 94 of 2022 by the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Vaduj, thereby rejecting the application under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Cr.PC") in connection with C.R. No. 92 of 2022, registered with the Dahiwadi Police Station, District - Satara, for the alleged offences punishable under Ss. 193, 199, 200, 419, 420, 423, 205, 209, 467, 426, 465, 468, 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "the I.P.C.") and under Ss. 3(1) (f) and 3 (1) (g) of the SC ST Act.
4. The prosecution case in brief is as under :
(a) First informant Mahadev Piraji Bhise cultivates agriculture lands bearing Gat Nos. 769, 781 and 782 alongwith his family members. The informant belongs to "Mang' caste. His father, namely, Piraji Vishnu Bhise died on 8/10/2016.
(b) According to prosecution, adjacent to land bearing Gat No. 769, the land bearing Gat No. 768 is owned and cultivated by Jaykumar s/o. Bhagwan Gore i.e. present appellant, who is the President of the Chhatrapati Shivaji Education, Mayani. For getting approach road to the institute from the land owned by informant, the President of the said institution submitted an application with the Assistant Director, Town Planning, Satara. In view of the Rules contemplated under Satara Pradeshik Yojana Vikas Niyantran, the 15 meter road passing through Gat No. 769 was mandatory. The present appellant had executed an affidavit bearing No. 4300/2020 dtd. 11/12/2020 before the learned Tahsildar/ Executive Magistrate, Man (Dahiwadi).
(c) The prosecution alleges that though the father of informant had expired on 8/10/2016, the present appellant alongwith other accused created forged Aadhar Card and by impersonating the said deceased, prepared affidavit and the same was submitted with the office of Assistant Director, Town Planning, Satara and Sub Divisional Officer, Khatav with an intention to cheat informant and his family members. Accordingly, an FIR came to be lodged.
5. Pursuant to the registration of offence and as the investigation of offence was set in motion, the present appellant approached the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Vaduj by moving an application under Sec. 438 of the Cr.PC and after hearing the parties, the learned Special Judge was pleased to reject the said application. Hence, this appeal and prayer for pre-arrest bail.
6. We have gone through the affidavit-in-reply filed by SubDivisional Police Officer, Dahiwadi Division, Camp Vaduj, Satara in response to the present appeal.
7. Mr.Mundargi, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, submits that since the alleged offence revolves around the documents and the fact that purported affidavit dtd. 11/12/2020 mentioned in the FIR is a got up document having doctored photo of the appellant and as also bears no actual and original signature and thumb impression of the appellant, custodial interrogation of the appellant is unwarranted. Learned Senior Counsel next submits that taking entire affidavit on its face value, the basic ingredients to constitute the offences under Ss. 3 (1) (f) and (g) of the SC ST Act are not prima facie made out as against the present appellant and therefore, the present appeal deserves to be allowed.
8. Mr. Gavand, learned APP, on the other hand, vehemently opposes the submissions and submits that at the relevant time, the appellant was working as a president of the Chhatrapati Shivaji Education, Kolhapur and the landed property of Gat Nos. 768 and 764 are owned by the said society. The landed property of Gat No. 769 is
