956-CRA-577-2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 956 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 577 OF 2026 Akshay Rajebhau Sarwade Versus The State Of Maharashtra And Another Mr. S. S. Bora, Advocate for Appellant Mr. N. R. Dayama, APP for Respondent No. 1 Mr. A. E. Madne, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 (appointed) CORAM :R.M. JOSHI, J DATE :OCTOBER 09, 2026 P. C. : 1. Appellant apprehends arrest in connection with C.R. No. 88/2026 registered with Police Station Shirur, District Beed for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 118(2), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va), 3(2), 3(V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. First information report indicates that an incident had occurred on 15.05.2026 in which present Appellant and 14 to 15 other persons said to have caused assault on the deceased in which he died. There is specific allegation against Hari that he assaulted the deceased on his heard. As far as present Appellant is concerned, there is allegation that he assaulted deceased on his back, hand and legs with iron rod. In the said incident 2026:BHC-AUG:47861 956-CRA-577-2026.odt deceased died. 3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that now charge- sheet has been filed after conclusion of investigation and in entire investigation conducted does not reveal that Appellant is responsible for the death of deceased. It is his submission that though 15 to 16 persons were arraigned as accused, now 8 persons have been discharged by the investigating officer since they were not present at the spot. This, according to him, shows false/over implication of the Appellant. He drew attention of the Court to the post mortem notes indicating that deceased has sustained single injury, which was caused on his head. He drew attention of the Court to the statement of witnesses including first information report indicating that none of the witness claims that Appellant is the author of the said injury on head. He, therefore, seeks liberty of the Appellant to be protected. 4. Learned APP and learned Counsel for Informant opposed grant of any relief to the Appellant by citing seriousness of the crime. It is their contention that the statements of witnesses clearly indicate presence of the Appellant at the spot so also the the act of he assaulting the deceased on his back, legs and hands. It is their submission that having regard to the provisions of Atrocities Act, once offence is made out under the said provisions, no pre-arrest bail can be granted owing to the embargo created by Section 18 thereof. 956-CRA-577-2026.odt 5. Prima facie perusal of the first information report does not indicate that this incident in question has occurred owing to the caste of deceased as it appears from the record that there are disputes between the parties so also there was a report lodged at the instance of wife of the Appellant against the deceased and others for molesting her. Thus, this seems to be a case of assault due to the previous disputes. Even if it is so, the prosecution is failed to show that present Appellant is one who is the author of the single injury caused on his head. There is absolutely no evidence on record to show that Appellant has caused assault on his head though there are other allegations that he caused assault on his legs, back and hands, however, the said allegations are not supported by the post mortem notes. This Court, therefore, finds substance in the contention of learned Counsel for the Appellant that this could be a case of false/over implication owing to previous disputes between the parties. Moreover, the material on record does not indicate application of provisions of Atrocities Act to the case and hence, embargo created by Section 18 thereof has no application to the case in hand. Hence, the order: O R D E R (i) Criminal Appeal is allowed. (ii) In the event of arrest of the Appellant in connection with C.R. No. 88/2026 registered with Police Station Shirur, District Beed for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 118(2), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 956-CRA-577-2026.odt 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va), 3(2), 3(V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, he be released on bail on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount. (iii) He shall attend the concerned police station as and when required. (iv) He shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly. (v) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner whatsoever. (vi) He is further directed to cooperate the investigating agency for further investigation. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) Malani