Partly allowed

Mahesh Haridas Dongare and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Aug 2014ABA/1081/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Dongare & Ors., accused of atrocities and defamation. The bench held that a prima facie offence under the SC/ST Act was made out due to caste abuse at a public place, creating a bar under that Act for arrest. Consequently, bail was denied to some applicants but granted as pre-arrest bail to Dattatray Dongar

What did the court decide?

Application partly allowed; pre-arrest bail granted to Dattatray Dongare on bond of Rs. 15,000 with conditions; bail refused to Mahesh and Shivaji Dongare.

Mahesh Haridas Dongare and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

25.ABA1081_2014.doc

¶2

Vidya Amin

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1081 OF 2014

¶6

Mahesh Haridas Dongare & Ors. … Applicants

¶7

vs.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶9

Mr. V.V. Purwant, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa, APP for the State.

¶10

CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 25^th August, 2014.

¶11

P.C.

¶12

This Application is moved for anticipatory bail by the

¶13

applicant/accused, who is prosecuted for the offences punishable under sections 504, 506 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, under section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and under section 7(1)(D) of Civil Protection Act in C.R. No. 50 of 2014 registered with Karmala Police Station, Solapur.

¶14

One Mahadev Namdev Navgire is the informant. He has stated that on 2^nd July, 2014 he had quarrel with Shivaji Haridas Dongare/applicant and on 9^th July, 2014 when he was going on a public road in front of one flour mill in the evening at around 6 p.m., all the applicants came in one car and stopped near him. They assaulted him and abused him by his caste as they knew that he belongs to Mahar caste and thereafter they

¶15

1 of 3

¶16

25.ABA1081_2014.doc

¶17

went away. The applicants belonged to Maratha caste. Hence, he gave the FIR.

¶18

The learned counsel for the applicants/accused has submitted that the incident has taken place on 9^th July, 2014. However, on 10^th July, 2014 Shivaji Dongare has given the complaint against one of the relatives of the informant that they had threatened Shivaji to give evidence in the atrocities case in their favour. He submitted that the informant has habit of lodging such cases in the Atrocities Act and many villagers have signed such application against him addressed to Police Inspector, Karmala Police Station on 12^th January, 2014. He submitted that an offence under section 3(1)(x) is not made out, as there is variance in the utterance by the applicants/accused. He submitted that the applicants/accused are falsely implicated in this case due to earlier rivalry.

¶19

Learned APP opposed the application. He relied on the police papers. He relied on the statements of three witnesses recorded under section 164 of Cr. P.C. by the learned Magistrate.

¶20

Perused the FIR which discloses that the applicants/accused Shivaji Dongare and Mahesh Dongare have uttered the words and abused by the caste of the informant. On perusal of the statement of three witnesses recorded under section 164 of the Cr. P.C. It appears prima facie that the

¶21

2 of 3

¶22

25.ABA1081_2014.doc

¶23

utterance of objectionable words is attributed to Mahesh Dongare/applicant. In view of this, as there is utterance at the public place at 6 p.m. in the market, prima facie offence under section 3(1)(x) under Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Act is made out. Hence, bar under section 18 of the Act while granting anticipatory bail comes in force. In view of this, prearrest bail is not granted to Mahesh Haridas Dongare and Shivaji Haridas Dongare. However, as no utterance is attributed to Dattatray Haridas Dongare, he is granted prearrest bail on the following terms and conditions:

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

(i) Application is partly allowed.

¶26

(ii) In the event of arrest, the applicant Dattatray Haridas Dongare be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in a sum of Rs.15,000/ with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶27

(iii) The applicant/accused Dattatray Haridas Dongare shall not tamper with the evidence.

¶28

(iv) The applicant/accused Dattatray Haridas Dongare shall attend to Dy. S.P. office on every Thursday between 6 p.m. to 7

¶29

p.m. for one month and shall cooperate the investigating officer.

¶30

(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶31

3 of 3

Mahesh Haridas Dongare and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Haridas Dongare and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramdas Gulab Khavale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bharat Bhiwa Jadhvar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anil Rajaram Desai and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Veerdhaval Umesh Chorge Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yuvraj Shivaji Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vishwanath Suhas Joshi Vs the State of Maharashtra