Disposed

Sadashiv @ Vikas Prakash Bandgar and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC20 Oct 2023APEAL/223/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail appeal arising from caste-based assault allegations, the High Court of Bombay ordered continuation of protection from arrest, subjecting appellants to weekly reporting to the police station pending the framing of charges against them.

What did the court decide?

Protection from arrest continued subject to weekly reporting to Jath police station from 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. on Thursdays for four weeks and first Mondays of every month thereafter.

Sadashiv @ Vikas Prakash Bandgar and Ors. Vs State of… — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

1/4 4 APEAL-223-23.odt

¶2

MANDIRAMILINDSALGAONKAR Digitally signed byMANDIRA MILINDSALGAONKARDate: 2023.10.2114:40:05 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.223 OF 2023

¶5

Sadashiv @ Vikas Prakash Bandgar & Ors.

¶6

.. Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Maharashtra & Anr.

¶9

.. Respondents

¶10

Mr.Ranjit Patil for the Appellants.

¶11

Mr.Y.M.Nakhwa, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent.

¶12

Ms.Megha Bajoria, Appointed Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

¶13

Dy.S.P. Sunil Salunkhe, SPDO, Jath, present.

¶14

Mr.Sunil Vhankhande, PN 186, attached to SPDO Offce, Jath, present.

¶15

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 20^th OCTOBER, 2023

¶16

P.C:-

¶17

On the last date of hearing of this Appeal, as the Complainant made a grievance that while he enroute his house, he was threatened by Appellant No.1-Sadashiv, the Complainant as well as the Appellants were directed to remain present.

¶18

The Complainant through the learned counsel Ms.Megha Bajoria narrated that some 15 days back, though he do not recollect the exact date, he was stopped on his way back to his

¶19

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶20

2/4 4 APEAL-223-23.odt

¶21

home by Appellant No.1 and he was threatened to withdraw the complaint. Admittedly, he did not lodge a report in respect of the said incident.

¶22

The learned counsel for the Appellants denied the said accusation and it is his specifc submission that the Complainant is not residing in village Baj, Taluka Jath, District Sangli anymore, but this contention is specifcally denied by the Complainant.

¶23

In any case, the Complainant is apprised that if any such incident is repeated and he receives any threat from the Appellants, either in person or through any person, or by telephonic call, he shall immediately report the incident to the Investigating Offcer and upon a simplicitor application being presented before the Court, either by the Complainant or at the instance of the Investigating Offcer, the protection in favour of the Appellants shall stand withdrawn immediately.

¶24

As far as the merits of the case is concerned, when the complaint is perused, it appears that the incident took place on the date of polling in Grampanchayat elections in the month of December 2022 and it is alleged that the accused persons, twelve of whom are named in the complaint, hurled casteist abuses at the complainant, which are specifcally attributed to Akshay Gadage, Accused No.2, but it is also alleged that Appellant No.1 hurled abuses at Piraji and, thereafter, all the accused persons assaulted him with fst and blows.

¶25

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶26

3/4 4 APEAL-223-23.odt

¶27

The injury certifcate of the Complainant is placed on record, which was referred to four injuries, being simple in nature, but it is also refected that when he was referred to Miraj Civil Hospital for x-ray, a linear undisplaced fracture of right transverse process of vertebra was noted alongwith a comminuted displaced fracture of medial wall of left maxillary sinus, minimal fuid in left middle ear. Hence, the injuries were classifed as grievous injuries.

¶28

This is the specifc reason why Section 325 is invoked in the subject C.R. alongwith Sections 323, 504, 506, 143, 147, 149 of the IPC coupled with the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶29

The Appellants were admitted to protection from arrest since 01/03/2023 and the protection is continued till date.

¶30

It is informed by the learned A.P.P. that the charge-sheet is fled against the other co-accused and, hence, the prosecution case is now crystallized in the charge-sheet.

¶31

The role attributed to the Appellants has, therefore, clearly surfaced on record and though it is seen that there is active participation of the Appellants in assaulting the Complainant and even Appellant No.1 has hurled abuses at Piraji, I do not think that custodial interrogation at this stage is necessary.

¶32

However, since it is informed that the charge-sheet is not fled against the Appellants, the Appellants are directed to report to the police station on every Thursday between 4.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. for a period of four weeks and, thereafter, as and when

¶33

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶34

4/4 4 APEAL-223-23.odt

¶35

directed, as a condition precedent to the order dated 01/03/2023, being confrmed.

¶36

Needless to state that if there is failure to report to the police station as directed, it would be construed as a breach of condition. Apart from these four weeks, it is directed that while continuing on the protection conferred by this Court, all the Appellants shall mark their presence on frst Monday of every month between 3.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. with Jath police station, till framing of charge.

¶37

At this stage, I record my appreciation for Advocate Megha Bajoria, who has effectively assisted this Court and rendered her able assistance to represent Respondent No.2. The Legal Services Authority is directed to ensure the payment of legal remuneration due and payable to her within a period of six weeks from today.

¶38

( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

¶39

M.M.Salgaonkar

Sadashiv @ Vikas Prakash Bandgar and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadashiv @ Vikas Prakash Bandgar and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Santosh Vishnu Sable Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Girish Ratilal Modi Vs the State of Maharashtra - C.B.I.

Kashibai Satyawan Darade and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra

Sunil Achyutrao Thete Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sadashiv @ Vikas Prakash Bandgar and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

P. Antony, Sole Proprietor Antt Green Builders vs Viceroy Properties LLP