SARUBAI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants. Perused the FIR and impugned order dtd. 19/5/2020 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Application No.82/2020 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Biloli Dist.Nanded, rejecting application fled by the appellants seeking anticipatory bail.

(2.) In brief, it is the contention of learned counsel for the appellants that the complaint was lodged more than 20 days after the alleged incident. It is contended that if the allegations made in the First Information Report are taken to their face value and accepted in its entirety, still they make out no ofence u/s 3(1)(r), 3 (1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989. In short, it is the contention of learned counsel for the appellants that no prima facie case exists to attract the ofence under the provisions of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and in that view, the application fled seeking anticipatory bail is maintainable.

(3.) On due consideration of the submissions advanced, I am of the view that the appeal deserves consideration. The complaint appears to be lodged after 20 days of the alleged incident. The appellants have taken a ground that the informant belongs to Koli community which is covered under the OBC category. It is the specifc contention of the appellants that the informant does not belong to SC or ST community. Hence, the following order.