Bombay High Court
Ajaysingh Motisingh Sengar vs State Of Maharashtra on 1 February, 2023
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal
1/4 08-APEAL-97-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.97 OF 2023
Ajaysingh Motisingh Sengar .... Appellant
versus
State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
.......
• Mr. Arjun Singh Thakur, Advocate for Appellant.
• Smt. M. R. Tidke, APP for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 01st FEBRUARY, 2023
P.C. :
1. In this case since the offence under the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (for short 'Atrocities Act') are applied, it is necessary to
hear the first informant as per the provision of 15-A of the
Atrocities Act.
2. Leave to amend for that purpose is granted.
Digitally
signed by
MANUSHREE
MANUSHREE V NESARIKAR
V NESARIKAR Date:
2023.02.03
16:54:36
Amendment to be carried out forthwith.
+0530
Nesarikar
2/4 08-APEAL-97-23.odt
3. Heard Mr. Arjun Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the
Appellant and Smt. M. R. Tidke, learned APP for the State.
4. I have heard learned counsel for Appellant as well as
learned APP for consideration of interim relief till the proposed
Respondent No.2 is served.
5. The Appellant has challenged the Order dated
17/01/2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel, in
Criminal Bail Application No.7 of 2023. In effect the Appellant is
seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No.295/2022
registered with Khandeshwar police station, Panvel, u/s 295A of
the Indian Penal Code and u/s 3(1)(v) of the Atrocities Act.
6. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that the
FIR is reflected in Ex.A annexed to this application. The FIR
mentions that there was a debate on a TV channel and during
that debate, certain opinions were expressed. He submitted that
3/4 08-APEAL-97-23.odt
the description of debate itself shows that the Appellant had
respect for members of all castes. At one place he has referred to
other castes members as 'his brothers'. According to the
Appellant, political parties were responsible for strained
relations between them. He submitted that the description itself
shows that he has high regards for different castes and therefore
no offence under the Atrocities Act is made out. He further
submitted that it was only a debate and he was answering the
questions asked to him by the T.V. anchor and therefore no
offence is made out against him.
7. Learned APP submitted that in the past there are two
offences registered against him at Khandeshwar police station.
8. I have considered these submissions. It is necessary to
hear the informant in this case. However, based on the
submissions made by learned counsel for the Appellant, he can
be protected by the interim relief till the next date.
9. Hence, the following order :
4/4 08-APEAL-97-23.odt
ORDER
(i) Leave to amend to add the first informant as a party Respondent. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.
(ii) Issue notice to the added Respondent returnable on 28/03/2023.
(iii) In the event of his arrest in connection with C.R.No.295/2022 registered with Khandeshwar police station, Panvel, till the next date, the Appellant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only), with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(iv) This order shall operate till 28/03/2023.
(v) The Appellant shall co-operate with the investigation.
(vi) Stand over to 28/03/2023.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)