Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
A.M.BADAR, J
Sapana Korde Nee Ketaki A. Ghodinde – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.965 OF 2017
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Niranjan Mundargi, Mr.Prasanna A. Bhangale
For the Respondents: Mrs.M.R.Tidke, Mr.Nilesh Y. Ukey
The court highlighted that allegations under the Atrocities Act require clear evidence of malice, which was lacking, and thus granted anticipatory bail.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 167, 177, 182, 211, 500; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(2)(p), 3(2)(q) and 3(2)(vii) - Rejection of anticipatory bail - The appellant challenged the rejection of bail, arguing that her complaint did not constitute atrocities and lacked malicious intent - The court found no prima facie case against the appellant for the alleged offences under the Atrocities Act - The order of the lower court was held unsustainable. (Paras 5, 26, 27, and 28).
(B) Atrocities Act - Application of provisions - Clarified that to sustain charges of false accusations against a Scheduled Caste individual, clear evidence of such malice must be established - The court emphasized that the allegations were not substantiated and the standard for bail was not met. (Paras 14, 20-24).
Facts of the case:
The appeal arose from a refusal of anticipatory bail concerning allegations made by a storekeeper that the assistant professor colluded to pressure him into withdrawing his previous complaint.
Findings of Court:
No prima facie case of offences was established against the assistant professor under the Atrocities Act.
Issues: Whether anticipatory bail could be granted to the appellant considering the allegations made.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the lower court improperly defined the burden of proof regarding the intent behind the complaints, leading to an unjust denial of bail.
Result: The appeal was allowed.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1 Leave to amend. The amendment be effected forthwith.
2 Heard.
3 Admit.
4 Heard finally considering the fact that the application is challenging the Order rejecting the application for anticipatory bail moved by appellant/accused Sapana Korde @ Ketaki A. Ghodinde, Assistant Professor working with the College of Engineering, Pune.
5 By this appeal, the appellant/accused Sapana Korde is challenging the Order dated 15/11/2017 thereby rejecting her claim for grant of pre-arrest bail in Crime No.3210/2017 registered with Police Station, Khadki for offences punishable under Sections 167 , 177, 182, 211, 500 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 3(2)(p), 3(2)(q) and 3(2)(vii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'Atrocities Act' for the sake of brevity).
6 Facts in brief leading to the registration of the crime in question and consequent rejection of the application for anticipatory bail moved by the appellant/accused Sapana Korde, Assistant Professor working with the College of Engineering, Pune are thus :
(a) First Informant/respondent No.2 Bhaskar Karbhari Gaikwad, who, at the relevant time, was working as the Storekeeper with the College of Engineering, Pune had lodged report against accused persons including appellant/accused Sapana Korde with Police Station Nigdi on 02/11/2017. This FIR has resulted in registration of the subject crime No.3210 of 2017. First Informant/respondent No.2 Bhaskar Gaikwad, in his FIR has alleged that previously at his instance Crime No.164 of 2016 came to be registered against the in-charge Director of Technical Education of the State of Maharashtra namely Subhash Mahajan and that matter was pending for sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the State Government. First Informant/respondent No.2 Bhaskar Gaikwad further averred that this Court had dismissed petition of said Subhash Mahajan for quashing the proceedings of Crime No.164 of 2016. Thereafter, accused persons namely B.B.Ahuja, the Director, Girish Joshi, the Administrative Officer of the College of Engineering, Pune and the appellant/accused Sapana Korde indulged in criminal conspiracy for compelling First Informant/respondent No.2 Bhaskar Gaikwad to withdraw the FIR in Crime No.164 of 2016 registered against the in-charge Director of Technical Education Subhash Mahajan. For this purpose, according to First Informant/ respondent No.2 Bhaskar Gaikwad, these accused persons started legal process to defame him. It is further averred in the subject FIR that on 06/05/2017, appellant/accused Sapana Korde, Assistant Professor lodged a false complaint against him by email. B.B.Ahuja and Girish Joshi then ordered inquiry of that complaint by a Committee constituted for prevention of sexual harassment of women at the work place. It is further averred in the FIR that on 31/05/2017, Professor Smt.Neela Rajhans informed the First Informant that no sexual harassment took place. With this, First Informant/respondent No.2 Bhaskar Gaikwad reported that only to pressurize him to withdraw the FIR lodged by him against the in-charge Director of the Technical Education Department namely Subhash Mahajan, the action of lodging complaint against him and the consequent actions were taken by the accused persons. This was done to screen said Subhash Mahajan from legal punishment, which might have been inflected on him under the provisions of Atrocities Act. It is further averred in the FIR that there is threat to life and property of the First Informant at the hands of B.B.Ahuja, the Director of the College of Engineering, Pune, Girish Joshi, the Administrative Officer of the said College and from the appellant/accused Sapana Korde, Assistant Professor.
(b) After lodgment of this FIR with the Police Station, Khadki and registration of the subject crime, all accused persons namely B.B.Ahuja, the Director of the College of Engine
