17-apeal.405.2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.405 OF 2022

1. Pandit Mukund Patil

2. Shobha @Pratibha Pandit Patil

3. Ramesh Kishor Jadhav

...Appellants

(Org. Accused No.2,3,4)

Versus

The State of Maharastra and Anr.

...Respondents

Ms. Pravada Raut a/w Mr. Yogesh Rawool i/b Mr. Shailesh S. Redekar,

for the Appellants.

Ms. P. P. Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1 – State.

Ms. Ameeta Kuttikrishnan, Appointed Advocate for the Respondent

No.2.

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &

V. G. BISHT, JJ.

DATE : 4^th JULY 2022

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

By this appeal, the appellants seek pre-arrest bail in

connection with C.R. No.102 of 2022, registered with the Arnala

N. S. Chitnis

1/5

NISHA

SANDEEP

CHITNIS

Digitally signed by

NISHA SANDEEP

CHITNIS

Date: 2022.07.05

16:00:19 +0530

17-apeal.405.2022.doc

Police Station, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 376,

376 (2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(w)(i) of

the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act (for short 'SCST Act').

3.

Perused the papers. This Court vide order dated 21^st April

2022 had granted interim protection to the appellants who are the

parents and maternal uncle of accused No.1 - Swapnil Patil. According

to the complainant, she was working in E-Seva Kendra run by the

Maharashtra State at Waliv, Vasai-Virar, whereas she was residing at

Ghateghar, Post Saiwan, Taluka Vasai, District Palghar. According to

the complainant, she met accused No.1 - Swapnil Patil, during her

commute to her workplace by bus. She has stated that accused No.1 -

Swapnil Patil sent a friend request to her as he had seen her while

travelling in the bus in 2018, which was accepted by her. She has

stated that thereafter they used to regularly chat on the social media.

According to the complainant, their friendship developed into a love

affair and that she accompanied accused No.1 - Swapnil Patil to

N. S. Chitnis

2/5

17-apeal.405.2022.doc

Arnala Beach on his request. She has stated that she had physical

releations with Swapnil, as he had promised to marry her. According

to the complainant, the said relationship was going on for almost three

years. She has stated that when she insisted accused No.1 - Swapnil to

marry her, accused No.1 - Swapnil told her that he would discuss the

same with his parents. She has stated that later on accused No.1 -

Swapnil informed her that his parents were of the opinion that his

elder brother should get married before him and till then, he should

wait. The complainant has further alleged that on 24^th February 2022

there was a meeting which was held between the family members of

Swapnil Patil and the complainant and that they had initially agreed to

get them married, however, they were of the opinion that the elder

brother of Swapnil should get married before him. She has further

alleged that in the second meeting which took place on 12^th March

2022 between her family members and the appellants, the appellants

disapproved the proposal of their marriage as she belonged to the

schedule tribe. Pursuant thereto, a complaint was lodged as against the

appellants and Swapnil. It is a matter of record that during the course

N. S. Chitnis

3/5

17-apeal.405.2022.doc

of investigation, original accused No. 1 – Swapnil was arrested and

subsequently enlarged on bail.

4.

This Court whilst granting interim protection to the

appellants vide order dated 21^st April 2022 has in para 10 , observed

as under:-

“10. Upon perusal of the FIR, we are prima facie of the opinion that

the Appellants had not humiliated the complainant by referring

to her caste. Section 3(1)(w)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and the

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 reads as

under:-

"3. Punishments for offences of atrocities - (1