Geeta @ Laxmi Ramchandra Pawar And ANR v. The State Of Maharashtra

1/4 nsc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.622 OF 2016 1.

Geeta @Laxmi Ramchandra Pawar 2.

Vinayak Ramchandra Pawar ...Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Dr.Prakash K. Deshmukh, for the Applicants Mr. Y. M. Nakhwa, A.P.P for the Respondent-State Dr.K.A.Dharne, SDPO, Satara.

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

DATE : 6th APRIL, 2016 P.C. :

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned A.P.P. 2.

At the outset, learned counsel for the applicants does not press the application, qua the applicant no.2. As far as applicant no.2 is concerned, he states that applicant no.2 will surrender before the appropriate Court on 11th April, 2016, after giving notice to the Investigating Officer, with regard to the place and time of surrender.

2/4 3.

By this application, the applicant no.1 seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No. 59 of 2016 registered with the Satara Taluka Police Station, Satara for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(R)(S)(E) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and under Section 7(1)(d) of Protection of Civil Rights Act.

4.

The incident took place on 18th February, 2016. It is alleged by the complainant - Ankush Lande that when he along with his brother Haridas was on their way to lodge a complaint at the police station, as against Pravin A. Pawar, the applicant No.1 along with other co-accused came there and started assaulting them. It is alleged that Pravin Pawar was armed with iron rod and Vinayak Pawar was armed with a stick. It is alleged that Pravin and Vinayak assaulted the complainant and Haridas with the said weapons and the other accused including the applicant no.1 gave fists and kick blows. It is also alleged that Pravin and Vinayak asked them to take back the case under the Atrocities Act which was lodged against them and allegedly uttered words which constitute an offence under

3/4 SCST Act.

5.

Learned Counsel for the Applicant no.1 states that the applicant no.1 is aged 68 years and the only allegation as against her is that she is alleged to have assaulted with fist blows. He submitted that applicant no.1 is not alleged to have uttered any words which would constitute an offence under SCST Act.

6.

Considering the role of the applicant No.1 and her age, the applicant is granted pre-arrest bail on the following terms and conditions :

ORDER

(i) In the event of the arrest, the applicant no.1 be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount ;

(ii) The applicant no.1 shall attend the concerned Police Station, as and when called for;

(iii) The applicant no.1. shall not tamper or attempt to influence the

4/4 complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case. 7.

The Application is partly allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

8.

It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie and are confined to this application and the learned Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made herein. 9.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.