RAJESH PANDURANG SALVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

                                   1              26-APEAL 708-26.doc



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.708 OF 2026

Rajesh Pandurang Salve                      … Appellant
      Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.             … Respondents
                                   -----
Mr. Satyam A. Surana i/by Mr. Atul R. Patil for the Appellant.
Mr. Mayur Sonavane, APP for Respondent No.1-State.
None for Respondent No.2.
PSI Pankaj Khopade, Kondhwa PS, Pune City is present.
                                   -----

                                CORAM :     N.R. BORKAR, J.
                                DATE    :   21ST 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 09th December 2025 passed by the Learned Special Judge,
Pune in Criminal Bail Application No.6540 of 2025.


2.       By the impugned order, the Learned Special Court has rejected the
application for anticipatory bail filed by the present Appellant, who is
apprehending his arrest in Crime No.561 of 2025 registered at Kondhawa
Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 303(2),
324(4), 189(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 352, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 3(1)(f)(g), 3(2) of the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “SC &
ST Act”).



     Mugdha                                                             1 of 3
                                   2                26-APEAL 708-26.doc



3.       It is the case of the prosecution that the first informant and his
relatives who belong to Scheduled Caste had jointly purchased land
bearing Survey No.33/3A, Yewalewadi, Pune, by a registered sale deed
dated 21st March 2024. It is alleged that the present Appellant and other
co-accused had illegally entered and encroached upon the said property of
the first informant and when he questioned them, they allegedly abused
and threatened him and his relatives of dire consequences. It is alleged
that they demolished the tin-sheds which were erected by the first
informant and his relatives on the said property.


4.       I have heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant and Learned APP
for Respondent No.1-State.


5.       Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant
himself belongs to the Scheduled Caste. It is submitted that the Appellant
has nothing to do with the alleged property dispute which is between co-
accused Kamlesh Ostawal and first informant. It is submitted that there is
a delay of about two months in lodging the FIR. It is further submitted
that the prosecution has already filed chargesheet against said co-accused
Kamlesh Ostawal.


6.       On the other hand, Learned APP for Respondent No.1-State submits
that considering the nature of crime, the Appellant may not be released on
anticipatory bail.


7.       I have perused the FIR. The main allegations are against co-accused



     Mugdha                                                               2 of 3
                                      3               26-APEAL 708-26.doc



Kamlesh Ostawal. The prosecution has already filed chargesheet against
the said co-accused. The Appellant cannot be charged for the offences
punishable under the SC & ST Act as he himself belongs to Schedule
Caste. There appears to be no need of custodial interrogation. 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.561
              of 2025 registered at Kondhawa Police Station for the
              offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 303(2),
              324(4), 189(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 352, 351(2) of the
              Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 3(1)(f)
              (g), 3(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
              (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, he 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