Allowed

Nandini Ananda Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC9 Dec 2021APEAL/570/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal for pre-arrest bail under the SC/ST (POA) Act, the Court held that since the dispute arose from a land and road disagreement rather than caste-based intention, the apprehension of stigma did not mandate bail refusal. The appeal was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Release on executing Pre-Arrival Bond for Rs.10,000 with one or more sureties in like sum, and attending the police station.

Nandini Ananda Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

17-APEAL-570-21.odt

¶2

Digitally signed by SHAMBHAVI SHAMBHAVI NILESH NILESH SHIVGAN SHIVGAN Date: 2021.12.09 19:12:59 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.570 OF 2021

¶5

Nandini A. Patil ...Appellant Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents

¶6

Mr. Abhijit M. Adagule for the Appellant. Smt.S.V.Sonawane, APP for the Respondent-State. Ms. Dhruti M. Kapadia for the Respondent No.2.

¶7

CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J. DATE : DECEMBER 09, 2021.

¶8

P.C. :

¶9

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned

¶10

Prosecutor for the State and the learned counsel for the Complainant.

¶11

2 By this Appeal under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (‘Act of 1989’ for short), appellant is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with the Crime No.313 of 2021 registered at Karveer Police Station, Kolhapur for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 323, 504,

¶12

Shivgan 1/3

¶13

17-APEAL-570-21.odt

¶14

506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3(1)(r),(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Act of 1989.

¶15

3 Primary evaluation, of the First Information Report, in no uncertain terms suggests, therein lies dispute between the family of the complainant and the appellant relating to the land and in respect of Gram Panchayat road. This fact is even not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. In fact, appellant’s son is friendly with the complainant and close to his family. Therefore, upon taking overall view of the allegations, in my view, the attendant circumstances, do not suggest that, the alleged insult and intimidation, was with an intention to humiliate, the wife of the complainant, only because she belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. Thus, allegations do not constitute offence under the Act of 1989.

¶16

5 Appeal is allowed. Hence, the following order:

¶17

ORDER

¶18

(i ) In the event of arrest of the Appellant in Crime No.313

¶19

of 2021 registered with Karveer Police Station, she shall be released on executing PR bond for the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one or more

¶20

Shivgan 2/3

¶21

17-APEAL-570-21.odt

¶22

sureties in like sum.

¶23

(ii) She shall attend the concerned police station as and when

¶24

called and co-operate in the investigation.

¶25

6 The appeal is accordingly allowed and disposed of.

¶26

7 It is made clear that observations made hereinabobve be

¶27

construed as expression of opinion only for the purpose of bail and

¶28

the same shall not in any way influence the trial in other proceedings.

¶29

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

¶30

Shivgan 3/3

Nandini Ananda Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandini Ananda Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

Ami Gururkrupa Housing Development Pvt. Ltd., and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ami Gururkrupa Housing Development Pvt. Ltd., and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ami Gururkrupa Housing Development Pvt. Ltd., and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

National Spot Exchange Limited Vs N. K. Proteins Limited and Ors.

Sara Shifan Chaudhary Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vasant Mahadev Thakar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.