Shubhada S Kadam 7-APEAL-1332-2024 (CR).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1332 OF 2024 Hanmant @ Dada Ananta Ghalme … Appellant versus The State of Maharashtra and anr. …. Respondents Ms. Manish Devkar along with Ms. Siddhi Patil, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Bhavik Mane, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mr. S. K. Fugare, PSI, Pandharpur Police Station present. CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 30th APRIL, 2025. P.C. : 1. The anticipatory bail application of the appellant is rejected by the learned Special Court, hence, the appellant is before this Court by way of present appeal. 2. The appellant is apprehending arrest in Crime No.428 of 2024 registered with Pandharpur Taluka Police Stationfor the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(1), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 119(1), 74, 333 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 3. It is prosecution’s case that on 21st November 2024 around 9.30 pm, the appellant and co-accused barged in the house of the first 1/3 SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2025.05.02 14:36:33 +0530 Shubhada S Kadam 7-APEAL-1332-2024 (CR).doc informant and assaulted him and his mother and outraged the modesty of his mother and snatched gold chain from the neck of his father and mangalsutra from the neck of his mother. The allegations against the appellant are that the appellant outraged the modesty of the mother of the first informant and pushed her on road. 4. It is contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. There are no specific allegations against the appellant that he abused the first informant on caste. The allegations of abuse on caste are in chorus. Interim protection is operating in favour of the appellant since 19th December 2024, the appellant has cooperated with the investigation. Hence, requested to allow the appeal. 5. It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the appellant and co-accused barged in the house of the first informant on the ground that the first informant had kept status of Modi. They abused him on caste and assaulted him with fists and blows. The allegations against the appellant are that the appellant outraged the modesty of the mother of the first informant and snatched mangalsutra of first informant’s mother and snatched gold chain of his father. Considering the allegations against the appellant, his custodial interrogation is required and requested to reject the appeal. 6. I have heard all learned counsel, perused the FIR and documents produced on record. 2/3 Shubhada S Kadam 7-APEAL-1332-2024 (CR).doc 7. The allegations in respect of caste abuse are in chorus. There are no specific allegations against the appellant that he abused the first informant on caste. The allegations against the appellant are that he outraged the modesty of the mother of the first informant and pushed her outside the house. The interim relief is operating in favour of the appellant since 19th December 2024. The appellant has cooperated with the investigation. Considering the allegations against the appellants, his custodial interrogation is not required and I pass following order : O R D E R 1. The order dated 19th December 2024 passed by this Court (Coram : Sandeep V. Marne, J.) is confirmed. The appeal is allowed in above terms and stands disposed of. 8. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) 3/3