1 14-APEAL 640-24.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.640 OF 2024 Reena Shailesh Mishra … Appellant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents ----- Mr. Namdev Gore i/by Aniruddha Kulkarni for the Appellant. Mr. Y. Y. Dabake, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Komal P. a/w Rahul Salve i/by Dhiraj Bansode for Respondent No.2. API Bansode, Manpada PS is present. ----- CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 29TH SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C. : 1. This Appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 takes exception to the order dated 17th May 2024 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan in Anticipatory Bail Application No.908 of 2024. 2. By the impugned order, the Learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by the present Appellant, who is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.600 of 2024 registered at Manpada Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 323, 504, 427 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “SC & ST Act”). Mugdha 1 of 3 MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE Digitally signed by MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE Date: 2026.10.01 18:48:52 +0530 2 14-APEAL 640-24.doc 3. It is the case of the prosecution that on the date of incident, which took place on 16th April 2024, a dispute arose between the family of the first informant on one side and the family of the Appellant on the other side on account of fetching of water from the public tap. It is alleged that during the said dispute the present Appellant and other co-accused assaulted the first informant by fighter punch. It is further alleged that caste abuses were hurled at the first informant and her family members, who belongs to Scheduled Caste, with a view to humiliate them. 4. I have heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant, Learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2. 5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that there is a cross FIR in relation to the alleged incident. It is submitted that the allegations in relation to the abuses on caste are falsely made against the present Appellant and other co-accused just to involve them in a serious offence. It is submitted that the alleged assault by fighter punch is not attributed to the present Appellant. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the prosecution has already filed chargesheet against the co-accused. 6. On the other hand, Learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and Learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 submit that there are specific allegations in relation to the offences punishable under the provisions of the SC & ST Act. It is submitted that there is a bar under Sections 18 and 18-A of the SC & ST Act to entertain the anticipatory bail application. It is submitted that the Learned Additional Sessions Judge has thus rightly rejected the anticipatory bail application of the present Appellant. Mugdha 2 of 3 3 14-APEAL 640-24.doc 7. I have perused the FIR. The assault by fighter punch is not attributed to the present Appellant. Prima-facie the alleged incident does not appear to have occurred in a public view. The prosecution has already filed chargesheet against the other co-accused. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the Appellant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order: ORDER i. The Criminal Appeal is allowed. ii. The impugned order is set aside. iii. In the event of the arrest of the Appellant in Crime No.600 of 2024 registered at Manpada Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 323, 504, 427 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, she shall be released on bail on furnishing a PR Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount. 8. The Criminal Appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (N.R. BORKAR, J.) Mugdha 3 of 3