3-apeal-938-2023.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 938 OF 2023 Parvati Maruti Patil & Anr …Appellants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Kuldeep Patil a/w Adv. Y. Sawant, Advocate for the Appellant. Ms. S. S. Kaushik, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 29.08.2026. P.C. : 1. This appeal takes exception to the order dated 07.08.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel, Raigad, in Criminal Bail Application No. 682 of 2023. 2. By the impugned order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by the present appellants who are apprehending their arrest in Crime No. 132 of 2022 registered at Taloja police station for the offences punishable under Sections 504 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(g)(u) & 3(2)(5A) of the Scheduled Castes and Pramod S.Lakare 1/7 PRAMOD SANTOSH LAKARE Digitally signed by PRAMOD SANTOSH LAKARE Date: 2026.08.29 17:31:18 +0530 3-apeal-938-2023.doc Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned APP for the respondent/State. 4. This Court on 29.08.2023 passed the following order : 1. The two Appellants are apprehending their arrest in connection with C.R.No.132 of 2022, registered with Taloja Police Station, which has invoked Sections 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(g)(u) and 3(2)(5A) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, “The Atrocities Act”). Appellant No.1 is a woman aged 75 years and is a senior citizen, whereas Appellant No.2 is informed to be a married woman, having a child of four years. They are apprehending their arrest in connection with the subject C.R., as their application came to be rejected by the Special Court on the ground of bar under Section 18 of the Pramod S.Lakare 2/7 3-apeal-938-2023.doc Atrocities Act. 2. Heard learned counsel Mr.Patil for the Appellants, who face strong opposition from the learned A.P.P. On perusal of the F.I.R., which has invoked the provisions of the Atrocities Act, it is seen that the complainant lodged a complaint, on 01/05/2022, where the accusations are levelled against Abhijit Maruti Patil, son of Appellant No.1 and it is stated that he hurled abuses at the complainant on 30/04/2022 in the evening hours, since a compound wall was erected by him around his plot, which is abutting to the plot, where the house of the Complainant is situated. On 03/05/2022 i.e. after two days, supplementary statement of the Complainant came to be recorded, wherein for the frst time, he referred to an incident, which took place on the very same date at 10.30 a.m., when Appellant No.1 is alleged to have abused him in the name of Pramod S.Lakare 3/7 3-apeal-938-2023.doc caste and, thereafter, in the evening hours, it is alleged that Abhijit Patil hurled the abuses at him. 3. Prima facie, the supplementary statement comes after a period of two days and the witnesses whose statements are compiled in the charge-sheet, for corroborating the Complainant, are his close relations and there is not a single independent witness. Considering the fact that the Appellant No.1 is a septuagenarian and in the wake of the improved version,which has surfaced through a supplementary statement, when in the original complaint, there is no reference to her and the incident involving her is alleged to have taken place in the morning hours of the date of the incident, I deem it appropriate to protect Appellant No.1 by the interim order, subject to her co- operation in the investigation. As far as Appellant No.2 is concerned, except the vague statement contained in the Pramod S.Lakare 4/7 3-apeal-938-2023.doc supplementary statement of the Complainant, recorded on 03/05/2022, stating that despite the complaint being lodged, mother and sister of Accused No.1 continue the quibble and abuses, there is no other material in the charge-sheet and even she deserve protection from arrest. 4. Hence, issue notice to respondent No.2, making it returnable on 25/09/2023. Notice shall be served through the Investigating Offcer, who shall apprise Respondent No.2, about his right of being represented in the Appeal, either by remaining present in the Court or through the counsel of his choice or seek assistance from the Legal Aid. Till Respondent No.2 is served and mark his presence, the Appellants deserve the protection by way of the following ad-interim order. :ORDER” (a) In the event of arrest in connection Pramod S.Lakare 5/7 3-apeal-938-2023.doc with C.R.No.132 of 2022 registered with Taloja Police Station, Appellant No.1-Parvati Maruti Patil and Appellant No.2- Vaijayanti @ Vishranti Maruti Patil @ Vishranti Ganesh Gaaykar shall be released on bail onfurnishing P.R. Bond to the extent of Rs.25,000/- each, with one or more sureties in the like amount. (b) The Appellants shall report to the concerned police station on Thursday and Friday between 3.00 p.m. and 5.00 p.m. for a period of two weeks and, thereafter, as and when called for. (c) The Appellants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Offcer and shall not tamper with evidence. 5. Re-notify to 25/09/2023. Pramod S.Lakare 6/7 3-apeal-938-2023.doc 5. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that, pursuant to the above order, the appellants attended the concerned police station and co-operated in the investigation. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation. 6. The learned APP submits that, considering the nature of offence, the appellants may not be released on anticipatory bail. 7. It appears that the prosecution has already filed the charge-sheet against the co-accused. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am inclined to confirm the interim order passed by this Court dated 29.03.2023. In the result, the following order is passed : O R D E R i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The order impugned is set aside. iii) The interim order passed by this Court dated 29.08.2023 is hereby confirmed. iv) The appellants shall attend the concerned police station as and when call by the investigation officer for the purpose of filing supplementary charge-sheet. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] Pramod S.Lakare 7/7