3-APEAL-1272-2024 (CR).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1272 OF 2024 Dhondiram Jaganath Bandal …. Appellant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. …. Respondents ----- Mr. Laxman Kalel, for the Appellant. Mr. Shrikant H. Yadav, APP, for the Respondent – State. Ms. Kanchan Pawar, for Respondent No.2. ----- CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 18th MARCH, 2025. P.C. : 1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 5th November , 2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Pandharpur whereby the Anticipatory Bail Application of the Applicant has been rejected. 2. The Appellant is apprehended arrest in Crime No.281 of 2024 registered with Pandharpur Gramin Police Station, Pandharpur, for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 76, 119(1), 118(1), 3(5), 352 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS Act”) and Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2), 3(v) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for Short “SCST Act”). Shantanu S. Dhudum 1/3 SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date: 2025.03.20 18:14:52 +0700 3-APEAL-1272-2024 (CR).doc 3. It is prosecution’s case that on 17th August, 2024, the Appellant had dragged the wife of the first informant in his house and outraged her modesty and snatched her gold chain. 4. It is contention of learned counsel for the Appellant that the Appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. The Appellant has filed also cross complaint against the first informant. Due to old dispute, the Appellant has been involved in this case. In the FIR, there is no mention that the Appellant has abused the wife of the first informant based on her caste. The Appellant is on interim relief and during interim relief, he has co-operated with the Investigating Officer. Hence, requested to allow the appeal. 5. It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that the Appellant had outraged the modesty of wife of the first informant. He dragged the victim to his house and outraged her modesty and snatched her two gold chains. The Appellant was aware about the caste of the victim. Considering the allegations against the Appellant his custodial interrogation is required and requested to dismiss the appeal. 6. I have heard all learned counsels. Perused the FIR and documents produced on record. Shantanu S. Dhudum 2/3 3-APEAL-1272-2024 (CR).doc 7. In the FIR, though there are allegations against the Appellant about the outraging modesty of the first informant’s wife, but there is no mention that he abused the first informant’s wife on her caste. The Appellant is on interim relief for the couple of months and has co-operated with the investigation. Considering these facts, his custodial interrogation is not required, and I pass following order:- ORDER i. The appeal is allowed. ii. The order dated 5th December, 2024 passed by this Court (Coram: Sandeep V. Marne, J.), is hereby confirmed. iii. The Appellant shall not contact with the victim, complainant or any other witnesses. iv. The Appellant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required. 8. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of. ( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) Shantanu S. Dhudum 3/3