1 944.CRAPPEAL-171-2025 .doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 944 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 171 OF 2025 SUDAM NARAYAN KADAM AND ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ….. Advocate for the Appellants : Mr. Dhore Akshay Raosaheb APP for Respondent/State : Mrs.Chaitali Choudhari Kutti Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mrs. Anita Gadekar (Appointed Through Legal Aid) … CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. DATE : 6th MAY 2025 PER COURT : . This criminal appeal is emanating from pre-arrest protection vide judgment and order dated 05.10.2024 in Criminal Bail Application No. 251 of 2024. Appellants are apprehending arrest in furtherance of C.R No. 424 of 2024 registered with Kurunda Police Station, District Hingoli for offence punishable under Sections 118(1),118(2),115(2),352,351(2),189(2), 191(2),191(3),190 of B.N.S,2023 and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) and 3(2) (v) of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that allegations against the appellants are fictitious and they are roped in due to old political rivalry. Informant and his family members are stated to be 2025:BHC-AUG:13419 2 944.CRAPPEAL-171-2025 .doc illegally in possession of part of gayran land i.e gut no. 89 at village Loleshwar. It is submitted that even the revenue authorities initiated action for their eviction which was also repelled by them. My attention is adverted to report lodged by talathi in C.R No.178 of 2022. Learned counsel submits that infact Appellant No.1/ Sudam was threatened and abused on 22.09.2024 which resulted into C.R No. 423 of 2024 and to counter blast, present offence is registered. It is vehemently contended that informant and his family members are not permitting any villagers to utilize the gayran land and they have a grudge against the appellants who are members of the trust of Mahadev Temple. It is further submitted that Respondent No.2 is in habit of filing false criminal complaints. My attention is adverted to judgment of acquittal dated 21.12.2024 in Special Case(Atro) No.5 of 2014 and C.R No.208 of 2022. Lastly, it is submitted that Appellant No.2/Kundalik is a disabled person and allegations against him are improbable. Reliance is placed on the medical papers annexed to the paper book. 3. Learned APP Mrs.Kutti tenders on record papers. It is submitted that specific role has been attributed to the appellants. Weapons used in the offence are yet to be recovered. She would draw my attention to the medical certificate of the informant. It is contended that in all probabilities, Appellant No.2 might have assaulted the informant with the stick used by him for support. 4. Learned counsel Mrs.Gadekar appearing for the Respondent 3 944.CRAPPEAL-171-2025 .doc No.3 adopts the submission of learned APP. She additionally would submit that her client is in possession of part of gayran land and cultivating the same. At the relevant time when the crop was ripened for harvesting, deliberately informant and his family members set the cattles in field so as to damage to the crops. It is contended that appellant along with other person committed offence with Mens rea and preparation. They are mighty and influential persons of the village. They are always over powering poor informant and his family members. 5. I have gone through rival submissions of the parties. I have considered the relevant papers of the investigation. Medical certificate discloses three simple injuries on the person of the informant. Appellant No.1/Sudam is alleged to have assaulted informant by sword. Prima facie, medical certificate does not corroborate the prosecution theory. 6. It transpires from record that there are multiple complaints tendered against the parties. C.R No. 178 of 2022 was lodged by talathi against the informant. On 19.07.2022 C.R No. 208 of 2022 was lodged by the informant against appellants and others. Both the appellants alongwith other persons were prosecuted in Special Case (Atro)No. 05 of 2014 and were acquitted on 21.12.2024. In this backdrop, if the allegations in the first information report are seen then it emerges that the dispute between the parties is about illegal possession and the cultivation by the informant and his family 4 944.CRAPPEAL-171-2025 .doc members over gayran land and especially of Gat no.89. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.3 is unable to satisfy this Court as to how the informant and her family members are inducted in cultivation and possession of the gayran land. 7. Various complaints and the proceedings referred above indicate that there is rivalry between the informant and his family members on one part and appellants and other villagers on the other part. Previously also such type of complaints were filed by the informant and his family members which is evident from C.R No.203 of 2022 as well as Special Case No.5 of 2014. Prima facie I am of the considered view that false implication of the appellants can not be ruled out. 8. Impugned judgment and order does not take into account above referred aspect of the matter. It is liable to be quashed. I, therefore, pass following order : ORDER a) Criminal Appeal is allowed. b) Impugned judgment and order dated 05.10.2024 in Criminal Bail Application No.251 of 2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Basmathnagar,Dist.Hingoli is quashed and set-aside. c) In the event of the arrest of the appellants, they shall be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.30000/- with one solvent 5 944.CRAPPEAL-171-2025 .doc surety each on condition that they shall not contact or tamper prosecution witnesses. They shall co-operate with the investigating officer and shall remain present as and when called for by the Investigating Officer till filing of charge-sheet. [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] vsj..