The Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail to a BJP worker, who hurled verbal abuse at a police constable and had made obscene gestures at her, after he tendered an unconditional apology.
The bench of Justice Manish Pitale was hearing an anticipatory bail application filed by Rutik Nagesh Landge, who had tried to break into a VVIP security cordon when Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath was holding a meeting at Pimpri-Chinchwad in Pune district on November 17, just before the Maharashtra Assembly elections.
Landge’s lawyers had argued before the Pune district court earlier that he is a party worker and the complaint is registered at the instance of party rivalry. However, after the Pune court refused to grant Lange any relief while noting that he obstructed the police constable when she was performing public duty, and he outraged her modesty by making obscene gestures, he moved the high court.
Another co-accused with Landge was also arrested by Bhosari police in Pune.
The accused had been charged under section 132 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), which concerns use of assault or criminal force against a public servant while discharging duties and other sections. The punishment prescribed for the offence is imprisonment, which may extend up to two years.
Justice Pitale observed that the allegations against Landge do indicate the behaviour and conduct attributed to him which had led to the filing of the case against him.
In the high court, however, advocate Shirish Gupte, appearing for Landge, submitted that such conduct cannot be defended and that he is ready to tender an unconditional apology to the lady constable. He stressed that no purpose would be served by insisting upon physical custody of Landge, and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation and, in fact, he deeply regrets the incident.
Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar, however, opposed this submission and argued that even after the FIR was registered, Landge had continued to take such steps that indicate that he was defiant and seeking to further harass the constable. Venegaonkar submitted that the morale of the Police would be adversely affected if relief is granted to such an accused person.
After hearing both sides, Justice Pitale observed that the constable’s statement did indicate abrasive and aggressive behaviour on Landge’s part, but there was no allegation of any physical assault or any act on his part that would suggest that he physically touched her inappropriately.
“It appears that the specific directions issued by the informant (constable), while on duty, were not only violated, but aggressive behaviour was shown towards the informant,” observed Justice Pitale.
However, since Landge “has expressed deep regret for the incident, and he has also undertaken to unconditionally apologise to the lady police constable. He has also specifically undertaken to cooperate with the investigation and to remain present before the Investigating Officer, if required,” observed the court while granting him relief.
