Dismissed¶¶21

Raghunath Pandurang Jadhav and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC8 Jan 2026APEAL/1030/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act S.14A criminal appeal against rejection of discharge application - Special Court, Special Case No. 843 of 2024 - incident of 3 December 2023 at 12th-day post-ritual function - Hitesh Verma / Swaran Singh public-view requirement excluding relatives and friends - witness Smt. Tivrekar statement prima facie inconclusive - no presumption only relatives/friends attend - issue left to be established by accused - Appeal dismissed - Bombay High Court, R. M. Joshi J., 13 March 2026.

What did the court decide?

Prima facie perusal of the statement of Smt. Tivrekar does not indicate that she is a friend of the victim. ¶¶17

Raghunath Pandurang Jadhav and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the rulings in Hitesh Verma and Swaran Singh - that caste-based abuse or insult attracts the Atrocities Act only when committed in public view excluding relatives and friends - apply to the present incident (stated to have occurred at a 12th-day post-ritual function attended by relatives and friends), so as to justify interference with the Special Court's rejection of the Appellants' discharge application. +1 more

¶¶14

Court's answer

Where the incident of abuse or insult over caste takes place in the presence of friends or relatives of the victim, the Hitesh Verma judgment would apply; but in this case that issue cannot be decided at this stage unless there is clear admission of the witnesses.

¶¶21

Ratio / Principle

Prima facie perusal of the statement of Smt. Tivrekar does not indicate that she is a friend of the victim.

¶¶17

Key takeaways

There is no presumption that only friends and close relatives would attend such a function; whether so is a matter of fact and it would be open for the Appellant/Accused to substantiate it.ratio¶¶20
The Appellants have failed to make out any case for interference in the impugned judgment and order rejecting their discharge application; hence the Appeal stands dismissed.ratio¶¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal No. 1030 of 2025 under Section 14A, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, challenging the Judgment and Order dated 28th August 2025 in Special Case No. 843 of 2024 whereby the Special Court rejected the Appellants' application for discharge in a case arising from an alleged incident of 3rd December 2023 on the occasion of a 12th-day post-ritual function. Counsel for the Appellants argued, relying on the statement of witness Smt. Tivrekar, that only relatives and close friends attended the function and therefore the Supreme Court decisions in Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr. and Swaran Singh and Ors. v. State through Standing Counsel and Ors. (offence under the Atrocities Act must be committed in public view excluding relatives and friends) applied, and that the Special Court erred in confining those judgments to quashment of FIR. The Court held that the statement of Smt. Tivrekar prima facie does not indicate she is a friend of the victim; that there is no presumption that only friends and close relatives attend such a function, it being a matter of fact for the accused to substantiate; and that whether the abuse occurred in the presence of only friends or relatives cannot be decided at this stage absent clear admission of witnesses. Finding no case for interference, the Appeal was dismissed. (Coram: R. M. Joshi, J.; decided 13th March 2026)

¶1

3-CRAPEAL-1030-2025.ODT

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1030 OF 2025

¶4

Raghunath Pandurang Jadhav And Ors …Appellants Versus The State of Maharashtra And Anr. …Respondents

¶5

Mr. Dhiraj U. Mirajkar w Mr. Vikas Kapile w Maitreyee Gadgil, for the Appellant.

¶6

Mr. Shailesh S.Ghag, APP, for the Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Anil Bansode, for the Respondent No.2. API Ajit Patil, Navghar Police Station, is present.

¶7

CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J.

¶8

DATED: 13^th MARCH, 2026

¶9

PC:-

¶10

This Appeal is under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 takes exception the Judgment and Order dated 28^th August, 2025 passed in Special Case No. 843 of 2024, whereby Special Court rejected application for discharge filed by the Appellants.

¶11

Learned Counsel for the Appellants drew attention of this Court to the First Information Report so also statement of witnesses recorded during the course of investigation. It is his submission that the alleged incident is the same which have occurred on 3^rd December 2023 on the occasion of 12^th day post ritual. It is his contention that with regard to the nature of

¶12

Page 1 of 3 13^th March, 2026

¶13

3-CRAPEAL-1030-2025.ODT

¶14

function, only close relatives and friends would attend such functions. In this regard, he drew the attention of this court to one of the witness, Smt. Tivrekar who stated about being very well acquainted with all persons present at the place. On the basis of this statement, it is sought to be argued that since the witness is the friend and the other persons present at the time of occurrence of the incident were relatives, the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand & Anr. and Swaran Singh and Ors. Vs. State through Standing Counsel and Ors. would have application to the present case. It is his submission that the the Special Court committed error in holding that the said judgment apply to the case of quashment of FIR.

¶15

The learned App and learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2/victim supported impugned order.

¶16

These cannot be any two opinions with regard to the law led down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Swaran Singh and Hitesh Verma (supra) . It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh Verma that for the purpose of attracting the provisions of Atrocities Act in so far as offences wherein the victim is a member of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, is abused or insulted over his caste. It is held that the offence would constituted, if it is committed in public view excluding the relatives and friends.

¶17

In so far as the present case is concerned, prima facie perusal of statement of Smt Tivrekar does not indicating that she

¶18

Page 2 of 3 13^th March, 2026

¶19

3-CRAPEAL-1030-2025.ODT

¶20

is a friend of the victim. The said statement shows her presence and the apparent occurrence of the incident in question. There is no presumption that the only friends and close relatives would attend the function like one in which the incident has occurred. Needless. to say that it is a matter of fact and it would be open for the Appellant /Accused to substantiate the said fact.

¶21

In respectful view of this court, the incident of abuse or insult over the caste takes place in the presence of friends or relatives of the victim, in that case the Judgment of the case of Hitesh Verma (supra) would apply. In this case this issue cannot be decided at this stage unless there is clear admission of the witnesses. Suffice is to say that the Appellants have failed to make out any case for the interference in the impugned judgment and order. Hence, Appeal stands dismissed.

¶22

VDMokal/-

¶23

Page 3 of 3 13^th March, 2026

Raghunath Pandurang Jadhav and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghunath Pandurang Jadhav and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Tausif Ahmed Shaikh @ Bob vs State of Maharashtra

Tausif Ahmed Shaikh @ Bob vs State of Maharashtra

Sultan Akhtar Mohd Hashim Shaikh vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Samira Raees Akthar Khan @ Shammo vs State of Maharashtra

Nikki @ Nikita Deepak Sharma vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Nisha Deepak Sharma vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.