ORAL ORDER

1. Present appellants filed Criminal Misc. Application Nos.1036 of 2021 and 1037 of 2021 before the Court of learned District and Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad u/s. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 requesting to enlarge the appellants on anticipatory bail on account of offence being registered vide C.R. No.11204039210420 of 2021 for the offence punishable u/s. 504 and 114 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(V-a) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 (for short "the Atrocities Act"), wherein learned District and Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad rejected the said application on

24.09.2021.

2. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, appellants have preferred present criminal appeal under Section 14 of the Atrocities Act.

3. Heard learned advocate for the appellants, learned advocate for the respondent no.2 as well as learned APP for the respondent-

State.

4. It is submitted by learned advocate for the appellants that the appellants are innocent persons and for the incident which has taken place on 10.09.2021, a complaint came to be filed on 17.09.2021 with a delay of seven days and without explaining the delay. It is further submitted that there is an issue in respect of use of right of way of land and the appellants have not at all intended to use any derogatory words against the complainant’s cast which would constitute an offence as alleged in the complaint. It is further submitted that it is only to put pressure on the appellants, absolutely false that complainant has been filed. It is further submitted that the complainants have no criminal history and the appellants are permanent resident of the address as given in the cause title of this appeal and are not going to run away. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the appellants to allow this appeal and release the appellants on bail in the case of their arrest in connection with the offence registered against them as prayed for.

5. Learned advocate for the respondent no.2 has strongly objected the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellants and submitted that there is prima facie case made out against the present appellants. It is further submitted that the appellants have played active role in commission of the offence and the investigation is not over nor chargesheet is filed. It is further submitted that accused persons are yet not arrested and if the appeal would be allowed by this Court at this juncture, accused persons will entice to commit the offence. It is further submitted that custodial interrogation of the accused is required, and therefore, prayer made by the present appellants to grant anticipatory bail may not be granted by this Court. It is further submitted that detailed explanation is given by the complainant for lodging the complaint after a period of seven days as there was sad demise in the family of the complainant and he was stuck in rituals and therefore, no relief can be granted on the ground stated by the present appellants. Learned advocate for the respondent no.2 has also filed an affidavit-

in-reply which is taken on record.

6. Learned advocate for the original complainant in Criminal Appeal No.1593 of 2021 also has supported the arguments advanced by learned advocate Mr.Hardik C. Thakkar, learned advocate for the respondent no.2 in Criminal Appeal No.1570 of 2021 and urged this Court to reject the prayer made by the present appellants.

7. Learned APP for the respondent – State has submitted that the dispute in respect of the way is pending before the revenue authorities. It is further submitted that a land grabbing complaint was also filed by the respondent no.2 which was also rejected by the District Magistrate. It is further submitted that allegations are made by the complainant in his complaint that certain derogatory words were used by the present appellants. Hence, it is requested by learned advocate for the respondent – State to dismiss these appeal