Criminal Appeal against rejection of pre-arrest bail. The High Court held the FIR pertained to a common land dispute not attracting SC/ST Act. Impugned order quashed and bail granted on P.R. bond.
Impugned order quashed and set aside; appellant to be released on P.R. bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1751-19-Apeal-28=.doc
Uday S. Jagtap
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1751 OF 2019
Girjabai Laxman Kale
.. Appellant
v/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
.. Respondents
Mr. Ghanasham S. Jadhav for the appellant Mr. A.A. Palkar, APP for the respondent State
CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.
DATED : 17th FEBRUARY, 2020
P.C.
for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(2)(va) 3(i)
1 of 4
1751-19-Apeal-28=.doc
Uday S. Jagtap
(w)(ii) of the Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2 of 4
1751-19-Apeal-28=.doc
Uday S. Jagtap
submit that the injury is simple and the charge-sheet has already been filed in the Court.
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1223 of 2019 on 20th November, 2019 is quashed and set aside.
(ii) In the event of arrest of the appellant in C.R. No. 331 of 2019 registered with Pandharpur Rural Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(2) (va) 3(i)(w)(ii) of the S.C.S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
3 of 4
1751-19-Apeal-28=.doc
Uday S. Jagtap
he be released on furnishing a P.R. bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur.
(PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.)
4 of 4
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the first information report prima facie disclosed an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act warranting pre-arrest bail rejection.
Whether the Additional Sessions Judge erred in considering the First Information Report when rejecting pre-arrest bail application.
Whether the Section 18 bar on bail under the S.C.S.T. Act attracted in disputes arising from percolation of water between adjoining land owners.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Girjabai Laxman Kale
The State of Maharashtra
PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
