Allowed

Shivaji Dagadu Sul v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC3 Apr 2024APEAL/1350/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellant sought confirmation of interim arrest protection in an FIR invoking IPC and SC/ST Atrocities Act offences. The court noted prior complaints contained no caste abuses, the FIR came after a six-month delay, and investigation was nearly complete. It allowed the appeal and confirmed protection subject to co-operation conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection from arrest dated 13 December 2023 confirmed; appellant to co-operate with investigation, report when called, and not tamper with evidence or threaten witnesses.

Shivaji Dagadu Sul Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

18-APEAL-1350-2023.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1350 OF 2023

¶4

Shivaji Dagadu Sul ...Appellant

¶5

vs.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents

¶7

*********

¶8

Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil a/w Ms. Sampada S. Patil:	Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. V.N. Sagare:	APP for State.
Lateron:
Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil:	Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. H.J. Dedhia:	APP for State.
Mr. Mohan Kalamkar:	(P.S.I.), Bharti Vidyapeet Police Stationpresent.

¶9

*********

¶10

CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 3^rd APRIL 2024

¶11

P. C. :-

¶12

When the matter is called out, it is submitted by

¶13

learned APP Shri Sagare that some Advocate for the first informant has come for inquiry and probably, he

¶14

may come in the afternoon.

¶15

1/5

¶16

Pallavi / V A Tikam

¶17

18-APEAL-1350-2023.doc

¶18

Lateron

¶19

Heard learned Advocate Mr. Kuldeep Patil for Appellant and learned APP for the State.

¶20

This Court has granted interim protection from arrest as per the order dated 13^th December, 2023. Notice was issued to Respondent No.2, was also duly served. There is a report given by Bibwewadi Police Station dated 13^th January, 2024.

¶21

There is an appearance by the Learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 on 2^nd February, 2024 and 20^th February, 2024 and even on 1^st March, 2024. However, today no-one is present on her behalf. It seems that vaklatnama is not filed. There is a sufocient compliance of the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶22

I am inclined to confirm the interim protection for following reasons:

¶23

Reasons:

¶24

(i) The incident took place on 10^th April, 2023 and

¶25

2/5

¶26

Pallavi / V A Tikam

¶27

18-APEAL-1350-2023.doc

¶28

immediately complaint was lodged to Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station and NC is registered (page 46), though there is a reference of abuses, there are no caste abuses.

¶29

(ii) The First Informant has complained to the Pune Municipal Corporation on 12^th May, 2023 (page 49), copies were obtained by the Appellant as per the provisions of the Right to Information Act. There is no complaint of caste abuses. Whatever complaint is there, is about not permitting her to attend the duty by the Appellant.

¶30

(iii) The present FIR is filed on 5^th October, 2023, after delay of almost six months.

¶31

(iv) The offence is under Sections 354-A, 384, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1) (w)(ii), 3(2) (va) and 6 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and

¶32

3/5

¶33

Pallavi / V A Tikam

¶34

18-APEAL-1350-2023.doc

¶35

Section 7(1) (d) of Protection of Civil Rights Act (page 18). In such circumstances, the ompediment to grant anticipatory has to be lifted.

¶36