Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court has granted anticipatory bail to Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena leader Waman Mhatre in a case filed against him for making derogatory remarks to a journalist covering the Badlapur sexual assault incident.

A single-judge bench of the high court, comprising Justice Sandeep Marne, heard the application filed by Mhatre, who was booked under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2024, and the SC/ST Act. Mhatre allegedly made a remark to the journalist, saying, "तुझा रेप झाला आे काय? तू बातम्या करायला येत" (Were you raped? Why did you come to cover the story?).

According to the prosecution, Mhatre, who belongs to the Agari community, was aware that the complainant belonged to the Buddha community, and despite this knowledge, he insulted her.

Waman Mhatre approached the Bombay High Court seeking anticipatory bail after the special sessions court rejected his pre-arrest bail application.

Mhatre contended that prima facie, the offences under Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act were not made out, as he neither knew the complainant’s caste nor had any reason to be aware of it. He further argued that the complainant herself did not support the allegations in the FIR. In her Affidavit-in-Reply, she stated that her FIR statement was not recorded as per her actual version.

The complainant contended that the ingredients of the offences under Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act were established in the case, thus invoking the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act, which prohibits granting anticipatory bail for such offences.

She further argued that the offence under the SC/ST Act was also applicable because the remarks made by Mhatre were intended to promote feelings of enmity, hatred, and ill-will against a member of the Scheduled Caste community.

The high court in its order recorded that, “The pari materia offences under Sections 354 and 509 of the Code, 1860 are included in the Schedule of the SC & ST Act. However it appears that provisions of SC & ST Act are not yet amended so as to incorporate offences under BNS in the Schedule. Be that as it may. The alleged gestures made by Appellant towards Complainant amounting to gestures of sexual nature is itself is a debatable issue. In my view therefore, it is doubtful as to whether even offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC & ST Act would be made out. In my view therefore prima facie there is room for holding that the offences under provisions of SC & ST Act are not made out against Appellant,” the order reads.