1

47 Appeal 465 of 2022.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

47 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.465 OF 2022

1.

Vijaymala Vinayak Jadhav.

2.

Radha Anil Jadhav.

… Appellants

Versus

1.

The State of Maharashtra.

2.

Silabai Sharad Pawar.

… Respondents

...

Mr. Mahesh Bhosle, h/f Mr. Mahesh L. Muthal, Advocate for Appellants.

Mr. R. D. Sanap. APP for Respondent/State.

Mr. M. B. Sandanshiv, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

...

CORAM :

SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.

DATE :

10^th August, 2022.

PER COURT.:

.

The appellants have challenged the order passed by

learned Additional Sessions Judge-2, Ambad, District Jalna in Criminal

Bail Application No.151 of 2022, whereby the prayer for anticipatory

bail came to be turned down.

2

Heard Mr. Mahesh Bhosle, holding for Mr. Mahesh Muthal,

learned counsel for appellants, Mr. R. D. Sanap, learned APP for

respondent No.1/State and Mr. M. B. Sandanshiv, learned counsel for

2

47 Appeal 465 of 2022.odt

respondent No.2/first informant. Perused the impugned order passed

below Exhibit-1 in Criminal Bail Application No.151 of 2022, copy of

FIR in connection with Crime No.157 of 2022 registered at

Ghansawangi Police Station, District Jalna and copy of FIR in

connection with Crime No.162 of 2022 registered at Ghansawangi

Police Station, District Jalna.

3

The learned counsel for appellants invited my attention to

the order passed by this Court dated 6^th July, 2022. He pointed out

that this Court has observed while passing the order on 6^th July, 2022

that the allegations levelled against the present set of appellants is to

the extent of assaulting the first informant by kicks and fist blows and

also then stated that had abused her with reference to her caste, but

specific abuses have not been disclosed. As such, this Court prima-

facie observed that the provisions of the Scheduled Caste and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 (hereinafter

referred to as “the Atrocities Act”) do not attract and pleased to grant

interim protection on certain conditions. He submitted that the

appellants have been released on interim bail. There is no report from

the investigating officer that the appellants have misused their bail. He

submitted that accused No.1-Vinayak Kisan Jadhav against whom

allegations are levelled that he has abused with reference to caste and

alleged to have beaten the first informant with stick, was arrested and

3

47 Appeal 465 of 2022.odt

later on released on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide

order dated 9^th June, 2022. He submitted that there is also counter

case filed by appellant No.2 against the first informant and others. The

civil dispute is going on between the parties. There are no

extraordinary circumstances to vacate the interim protection granted

earlier by this Court. The interim protection granted by this Court

needs to be made absolute by allowing the appeal.

4

Mr. R. D. Sanap, learned APP for the respondent/State

and Mr. M. B. Sandanshiv, learned counsel for respondent No.2/first

informant strongly opposed to confirm the interim protection granted by

this Court earlier. Both of them submitted that the provisions of the

Atrocities Act prima-facie attract. As such, there is bar to grant

anticipatory bail. They further submitted that the first informant and her

family members were brutally beaten in the incident and they have

been referred for medical examination. Medical certificates are also

placed on record. There are statements of eye-witnesses (five in

number), who are supporting the prosecution case.

5

Mr. Sandanshiv, learned counsel for respondent No.2

invited my attention to certain photographs, which are at page Nos.36

and 37 and submitted that the first informant was badly beaten in the

incident of assault and she became unconscious on the spot. By

4

47 Appeal 465 of 2022.odt

making arrangement of private vehicle, sh