MAHESH SAKHARAM PATOLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicants and learned A. P. P for the State.

(2.) THE applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in C. R. No. 3003 of 2009 of devgad Police Station, Dist.-Sindhudurg. The crime has been registered against the applicants for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 3 (l) (x) of Scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "the Act") and sections 504, 506 read with section 34 of the IPC.

(3.) MS. Walimbe, learned counsel for the applicants, at the outset, invited my attention to the FIR and submitted that by no stretch of imagination, the incident, as is disclosed therein, can be stated to have taken place within public view, as contemplated by section 3 (l) (x) of the Act. She submitted that the incident allegedly occurred on 9. 3. 2009 at 3. 30 am in the courtyard of the complainant's house. This place may be visible to the public or within public view, but the incident was not viewed by the public. In other words, she submitted, from bare perusal of the FIR it is clear that no member of the "public" was present when the applicants allegedly abused the complainant on his caste with intent to humiliate him. She then submitted that since no offence under section 3 (l) (x) of the Act is, prima facie, made out against the applicants, they are entitled for anticipatory bail, as prayed in this application. On the other hand, mr. Saste, learned APP, submitted that the family members of the complainant and their resident servant were present at the relevant time and their presence was sufficient to attract the provisions of section 3 (1) (x) of the Act.