Court dismissed criminal appeal against Additional Sessions Judge's order rejecting pre-arrest bail application under SC & ST Act, holding prima facie material exists.
Appeal dismissed; rejection of pre-arrest bail application upheld.
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.
k 1/2 29 cri apeal 1197.24 as.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1197 OF 2024
Sandeep Rajaram Shinde & Ors. ....Appellants V/S State of Maharashtra & Ors. ....Respondents
Mr. R. Sathyanarayanan Iyer for the Appellants. Ms. Anuja S. Gotad, APP for Respondent No.1/State.
Mr. P.V. Tagad, PSI, Wadner Bhairav Police Station.
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 12 NOVEMBER 2024.
P.C.:
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 22 October 2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Niphad, rejecting the Application for pre-arrest bail under provisions of section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ) in connection with C.R. No.286 of 2024 registered with Wadner Bhairav Police Station for the offences punishable under sections 115, 118(1), 118(2), 351(2), 352 read with section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and under sections 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of the SC & ST Act.
katkam Page No. 1 of 2
k 2/2 29 cri apeal 1197.24 as.doc
2 Perusal of the FIR statement would indicate that the Appellants have allegedly assaulted the husband of the Complainant. There is a direct allegations of Appellant No.1 Sandeep Rajaram Shinde giving a blow to the husband on his head with a stone. The injury certificate indicates grievous injuries caused to the Complainant's husband on account of assaults committed on him. The stone used for committing the assault is apparently recovered. Thus there appears to be prima facie material against the Appellants and their custodial interrogation would be necessary for conducting investigations into the crime. No case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly rejected the Applications preferred by the Appellants. No serious infirmity can be traced in the impugned order dated 22 October 2024. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed .
(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)
Digitally signed by SUDARSHANRAJALINGAM SUDARSHANRAJALINGAMKATKAM KATKAM Date: 2024.11.14 11:34:59 +0530
Page No. 2 of 2
katkam
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted to the appellants under section 482 BNSS in a case under SC & ST Act.
Whether there is sufficient prima facie material against the appellants to justify their custodial interrogation.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Sandeep Rajaram Shinde
State of Maharashtra
Sandeeep V. Marne
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
