RAMESH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Beed in Misc. Criminal Application No.30/2020 to refuse to grant pre-arrest bail to the appellant, the appellant-original applicant has preferred this appeal U/Sec. 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 (Hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocities Act").

(2.) Before adverting to deal with the submissions advanced, it is useful to refer few facts leading to filing of application seeking pre-arrest bail. On 13.01.2020, the respondent no.2-informant visited the Police Station Shivajinagar, Beed and lodged report, alleging therein that on 12.01.2020, at about 11 am. the appellant came to his shop to collect his footwear given for repair. When the informant handed over footwear to him, the appellant refused to accept the same and said that same are not the footwear given for repair. He abused the informant in the name of his caste. The customers and the workers present in the shop intervened. In order to avoid dispute, informant provided him pair of new footwear. Thereafter he left the shop. At about 7 p.m., the appellant again came to his shop along with three persons and started beating his employees and also assaulted him by means of farandi [a sharp edged tool used for cutting leather generally used by cobbler]. On the basis of complaint lodged by informant Police registered offence under section 323 , 504 , 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Atrocities Act vide C.R. no.30/2020 against the appellant and three unknown persons.

(3.) Apprehending arrest on account of complaint dated 13.01.2020 lodged by the respondent no.2 - informant, the appellant filed an application U/Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C . before the Sessions Court, Beed seeking pre- arrest bail. By the impugned order dated 31.01.2020, the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected the application by observing that bar operate U/Sec. 18 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 from entertaining the applications seeking anticipatory bail. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal.