MARGAO
Additional South Goa Sessions Judge Kshama M Joshi has observed in the Datta Damodar Naik anticipatory bail matter that the Court has to have a balanced approach for the grant of anticipatory bail.
While granting conditional bail to the Konkani writer on Monday, Judge Kshama Joshi has observed that the applicant has expressed regret for hurting public sentiments if any in his public statement published and made at the felicitation function held on 05/01/2025 which is reported in daily Gomantak dated 06/01/2025 produced on record.
“The applicant is cooperating with the investigation as he has appeared and his statement is also recorded and for the grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to have a balanced approach. In this case the investigation is still in progress and if the applicant is released on anticipatory bail the investigation cannot be said to be hampered,” the judge said.
The Judge added: “As rightly submitted by advocate for the applicant Adv Cleofato Coutinho the custody of the applicant is not required for the purpose of investigation as notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS has already been issued by the IO which shows that the IO does not intend to arrest the applicant. However, the Investigating Officer who has filed the reply has stated in para 4 of the reply that in order to carry out effective investigation to collect more evidences in the present case and to take the present case to its logical conclusion the applicant/ accused is very much required, in police custody which statement is contrary as notice is issued under section 35(3)”.
The Judge further observed that the complaint was filed by the complainant for hurting the sentiments of Hindu religion and the religious belief which is against temples, Partagal Math as well as Hindu priests for which the FIR has been registered and thereafter supplementary statement was recorded.
“Upon viewing of the interview made on TV channel and the ABA No. 07/2025 Page 13 of 17 statements made expressing regrets for hurting public sentiments if any in his public statement published. Only certain words from the interview cannot be considered to prima facie say that it was made with malicious intention but it has to be taken as a whole,” the judge added.
