SAHIL RAMESH SONAVANE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue in the present case arises out of an Order granting ad- interim bail by the Learned Special Judge, Kalyan without issuing the prior notice to the Victim and without hearing the Victim of an offence under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "Atrocities Act"). There is no dispute about the fact that during pendency of present appeal, Anticipatory Bail Application filed by appellant came to be rejected by Special Court and consequently the appeal filed against ad-interim relief granted therein has become infructuous. However, Appellant insists for passing order on the issue raised by him. Thus, the issue remains before this Court that "whether the Special Court can grant ad-interim relief without issuance of notice to the Victim u/s 15A(3) and also without hearing the victim u/s 15A(5) of the Atrocities Act."

(2.) The Ld. Counsel for the Appellants submits that it is a well settled law that the Anticipatory Bail under Atrocities Act can be granted only when the prima facie case is not made out. In order to arrive at such conclusion, victim needs to be heard as per the requirements of Sec. 15A(5). He further submits that when the interim relief is to be granted pursuant to the bail application, it is seen whether the prima facie case is made out or not, hence at interim stage also, the victim is needed to be heard. While relying on the statutory provisions, he submits that Sec. 15A(5) mandates that the victim should be heard at every proceeding including bail proceedings and the interim relief in bail application is a part of bail proceedings. Therefore, he submits that the interim order granting ad-interim bail cannot be excluded from the bail proceedings and it is mandatory to hear the victim at interim stage as well.

(3.) Ld. Counsel for Appellants to support his contentions relied on the following judgments :