JUDGMENT :

VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.

1. Admit.

2. Present Appeal has been filed by the original accused under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short “the Atrocities Act”) to challenge the order dated 15th March 2023 by the learned Special Judge under the Atrocities Act / the Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada, District-Nandurbar thereby rejecting the bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, at Exhibit-27 in Sessions Case No.52 of 2020.

3. Heard Mr. Choudhari, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant, Mr. Phule, learned APP appearing for respondent No.1 and Ms. Manjushri Narwade, learned Advocate appearing for respondent No.2.

4. It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the appellant that the appellant came to be arrested on 24th October 2020 and since then he is in jail. The charge-sheet is filed, therefore, his custody is not required for the purpose of investigation. Present respondent No.2 filed the First Information Report (for short “the FIR”) contending that his daughter, who was aged 15 years, taking education in 10th standard in 2020, went missing in the intervening night of 22nd October, 2020 and 23rd October 2020. Search was undertaken but she could not be found. Around 6.00 a.m. on 23rd October 2020, her Odhani was found in front of house which was stained with blood, but her whereabouts could not be found. Even police along with villagers took intensive search and then the dead body of the girl was found in the field of one Sharad Babulal Patil and it appears that at the time of FIR, suspicion was expressed against the present appellant, as he had expressed love for the girl and the girl was not ready to go with him.

5. Learned Advocate for the appellant further submitted that perusal of the charge-sheet would show that the case of the prosecution is resting on extra judicial confession alleged to have been given to one Vijay Padvi, that too on phone. However, at this stage the call details have not been collected and attached. Such statement of the said person has been recorded on 26th October 2020 i.e. three days after the incident. With such evidence the appellant need not be kept behind bars. The appellant is ready to abide by the terms of the bail. The learned Special Judge absolutely not considered all the facts while dealing with application Exhibit-27.

6. Per contra the learned APP as well as learned Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 strongly opposed the Appeal and submitted that the learned Special Judge has used the discretion properly in rejecting the bail application. Perusal of the postmortem report would show that there were six surface wounds on the dead body. There was also fracture of C7 vertebrae on Palpation. The probable cause of death is “Shock due to cut throat injury (unnatural). Associated findings – Genital injury.” The throat of the girl was cut with sharp weapon and the said weapon has been discovered by the present appellant. The girl was residing adjacent to the house of the accused and therefore, he had knowledge about the caste of the girl. The girl is member of the scheduled tribe and therefore, offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the Atrocities Act is involved in this case. The family members are saying that the girl was not ready to flee with the accused as she was minor, though the accused used to say that he loves her. Witness Vijay Padvi appears to be friend of the appellant and he says that around 9.00 p.m. on 22nd October 2020 while accused and he himself were chitchatting, accused expressed that he loves the girl and he is therefore asking her to come along with him but she is not ready, if the girl does not accompany him that night, then he would kill her. Then the friend had advised the accused that he should not do such act. But then in the next morning around 8.00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m. said friend received phone call from accused saying that he is repenting for killing the girl. At pr