18-apeal-711-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 711 OF 2026 1. Rovina Sheldon Remedius 2. Sheldon Desmond Remedius …Appellants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Chaitanya Pendse a/w Mr. Pavan Patil, Mr. Amit Mane, Mr. Atharva Jagtap & Mr. Soham Badole, Advocate for the Appellants. Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Praful A. Salvi, a/w Mr. Vighnesh Kadam, Mr. Sarthak Kadam, Mr. Nitin Salvi, i/b Mr. Vicky Salve, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 08.09.2026. P.C. : 1. This appeal filed under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, takes exception to the order dated 09.07.2026 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Borivali Division, Dindoshi, Goregaon, Mumbai in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 742 of 2026. 2. By the impugned order, the learned Additional Sessions Pramod S.Lakare 1/5 18-apeal-711-2026.doc Judge has rejected the application for anticipatory bail filed by the present appellants, who are apprehending their arrest in Crime No. 153 of 2025 registered at Gorai Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 351(3), 352, 189(2), 190 & 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3(1)(r) & 3(1) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 3. There was a property dispute between the deceased and the family members of the present appellants. It is alleged that on account of said property dispute, on the date of the incident, which took place on 12.12.2025, the present appellants and other co-accused formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the deceased by knife and committed his murder. It is further alleged that the deceased and his family members, who belong to Scheduled Tribe, with a view to humiliate them were abused by the appellants on their caste. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned APP for the respondent/State and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Pramod S.Lakare 2/5 18-apeal-711-2026.doc 5. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have nothing to do with the alleged crime. It is submitted that in the first information report lodged by the wife of the deceased who is also an eye witness to the incident, nothing is alleged against the present appellants. It is submitted that even in the statements of the eye witnesses, no specific overt act is attributed to the present appellants. It is submitted that the first informant in her supplementary statement dated 24.12.2025 with some ulterior motive for the first time had made afterthought allegations against the present appellants that they abused her and the deceased in filthy language. It is submitted that nothing is to be recovered at the instance of the appellants, and therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation. It is submitted that there are no other criminal antecedents against the appellants. 6. On the other hand, the learned APP for the respondent- State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 submit that the appellants are involved in the serious offence of murder. It is submitted that the present appellants were present at the place of the incident and there are statements of eye-witnesses to that effect. It is submitted that, considering the nature of the crime and Pramod S.Lakare 3/5 18-apeal-711-2026.doc in view of the bar contained under Sections 18 and 18-A of the SC & ST Act, the present appellants may not be released on anticipatory bail. 7. I have perused the charge-sheet. In the first information report lodged by the wife of the deceased, who is an eye-witness to the incident, nothing is alleged against the present appellants. The eye witnesses have not attributed any overt-act to the present appellants. The possibility of making afterthought allegations against the appellant therefore, cannot be ruled out. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am inclined to release the appellants on anticipatory bail. In the result, the following order is passed. O R D E R i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The order impugned is set aside. iii) In the event of arrest of the appellants in connection with Crime No. 153 of 2025 registered at Gorai Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 351(3), 352, Pramod S.Lakare 4/5 18-apeal-711-2026.doc 189(2), 190 & 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3(1)(r) & 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the appellants be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount. iv) The appellants shall not enter into the jurisdiction of the Gorai Police Station till conclusion of the trial. v) The appellants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. 8. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] Pramod S.Lakare 5/5