Allowed

Samar Abbas Abbas Hussain Sayyed v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC17 Oct 2024APEAL/1133/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court admitted an appeal against the rejection of pre-arrest bail under Section 482 BNSS. Although a land dispute exists, Section 18 of the SC & ST Act was deemed inapplicable as caste-based utterances occurred on a telephone and not in public view. The court allowed interim protection and directed the investigation officer to record the second respondent's statement.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail granted on furnishing PR bonds of Rs. 25,000 with solvent sureties, subject to appearance before investigating officer and non-interference conditions.

Samar Abbas Abbas Hussain Sayyed vs State of Maharashtra and… — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

k 1/3 501 cri apeal 1133.24 as.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1133 OF 2024

¶4

Samar Abbas Abbas Hussain Sayyed V/S The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

¶5

....Appellant

¶6

....Respondents

¶7

Ms. Sartaj Shaikh for the Appellant. Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for Respondent No.1/State.

¶8

CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 17 OCTOBER 2024.

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1 This Appeal is filed under the provisions of section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ( SC & ST Act ) challenging order dated 10 October 2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Vasai, by which Appellant’s application for pre-arrest bail under provisions of section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhas Sanhita, 2023 in connection with CR No.648 of 2024 for offences punishable under sections 427 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code alongwith section 3(1)(g) of the SC & ST Act, is rejected.

¶11

2 FIR statement would prima facie indicate existence of dispute between the parties over land. The caste based utterances are allegedly made on a telephone and prima facie it katkam Page No. 1 of 3

¶12

k 2/3 501 cri apeal 1133.24 as.doc

¶13

appears that same was not made in public view. In that view of the matter bar under provisions of section 18 of the SC & ST Act may not apply in the present case. In that view of the matter Appellant needs to be granted interim protection till Respondent No.2 puts in his appearance.

¶14

3 Issue notice Respondent No.2, returnable on 20 November 2024 .

¶15

4 In the meantime, the concerned Investigating Officer shall record statement of Respondent No.2-Complainant as to whether he wishes to engage private advocate or to avail services of Legal Aid Advocate. The statement of Respondent No.2 should be produced before the next date of hearing.

¶16

5 Till the next date of hearing, in the event of arrest of the Appellant in connection with C.R. No.648 of 2024 registered with Pelhar Police Station for offences punishable under sections 427 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code alongwith section 3(1)(g) of the SC & ST Act, he shall be released on interim bail on furnishing PR bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount on the following terms and conditions:

¶17

i) Appellant shall remain present before the Investigating Officer on 24 and 25 October 2024 between 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. and shall co-operate for completion of investigation.

¶18

katkam Page No. 2 of 3

¶19

k 3/3 501 cri apeal 1133.24 as.doc

¶20

ii) Appellant shall not attempt to contact or pressurize the Complainant or any of the witnesses associated with the case in any manner nor shall he tamper with the evidence in the case.

¶21

(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by SUDARSHANRAJALINGAM SUDARSHANRAJALINGAMKATKAM KATKAM Date: 2024.10.17 17:34:04 +0530

¶23

Page No. 3 of 3

¶24

katkam

Samar Abbas Abbas Hussain Sayyed v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samar Abbas Abbas Hussain Sayyed 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bhogawati Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Shahunagar Thr Trustee S.S. Patil vs Jaysing Gopalrao Jadhav Hujare and Ors.

Rajendra Vishwanath Adake vs Bhogawati Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Shahunagar and Ors.

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (Msrtc), Nashik Thr.Divisional Controller vs Nathu Shivram Jagtap(Deceased-Deleted and Anr.)

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Msrtc, Thr. General Manager vs Shri. Dattatray Nivrutti Tale and Anr.

Maharashtra State Transport Corporation Thr. Divisional Controller vs Smt. Swati Sanjay Valanju and Ors.

Shubhangi Prakash Thorat vs Narender Singh Ratan Singh Saini and Ors.