PRASHANT RAMDAS MALLAPUR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Counsel for the parties. Perused the record. The apprehension of the Applicants is that they are likely to be arrested in connection with CR.No.89/2004 registered with Mangaon Police Station, Raigad, for offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504 and 508, I.P.C.; and section 3(i)(vi) and (x) of the Prevention of Atrocities Act. It is not in dispute that offences other than the provisions of the Prevention of Atrocities Act referred to above are bailable. The Court below has rejected the anticipatory bail application essentially on the ground of bar under section 18 of the Prevention of Atrocities Act to entertain such application. Indeed, the Court below has also noted that the bar is not absolute, but still preferred to reject the anticipatory bail application preferred by the Applicants. The argument as was canvassed before the Court below and also reiterated before this Court is that going by the prosecution version, as occurring in the first information report, it is stated that the Applicants are not familiar with Marathi language as can be discerned from the second para on page 27. Inspite of this, in the penultimate para, the complainant has attributed utterances by the Applicants which would attract the provisions of the Prevention of Atrocities Act. If the Applicants are not familiar with Marathi language, it is preposterous to allege that the Applicants have uttered the expressions referred to in the penultimate para of the F.I.R. Obviously, that has been done only to ensure that the Applicants will be kept in custody and not be entitled to avail bail. If such is the purpose of making false accusations against the Applicants, surely, in the interest of justice, the Applicants deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail on the following terms.