Allowed

Dhanraj Babruwan More v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC29 Sept 2015APPR/382/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail suspension application, the Court allowed the applicant's request to suspend the substantive sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment and enlarged the applicant on bail and furnished court conditions.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of substantive sentence; enlargement on bail by furnishing PR bond of Rs. 15,000 with one or two sureties; recall of earlier order dated 18/06/2015.

Dhanraj Babruwan More Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

1 901.382.15 appr

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 382 OF 2015 IN

¶3

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION 331 OF 2014

¶4

Dhanraj Babruwan More .....Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent

¶5

Mr. Priyal Sarda i/b Mr. Vikram Tarepail for Applicant Mrs. A. A. Mane APP for the State.

¶6

CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 29, 2015.

¶7

PC :

¶8

Heard. This is an application seeking suspension of substantive sentence and enlargement on bail during the pendency of revision application.

¶9

On 10/10/2014, revision application was dismissed for want of

¶10

prosecution and hence applicant was taken into custody. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially applicant was granted bail on merits. The sentence is a short term sentence. Applicant has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year. That applicant was on bail during the pendency of trial as well as during the pendency of appeal and had not committed breach of any conditions imposed upon him. Revision application was dismissed due to negligence of learned counsel representing him and therefore, he cannot be

¶11

ism

¶12

2 901.382.15 appr

¶13

punished by way of punitive detention, although he has good case on merits.

¶14

1. In view of this, following order is passed.

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

(i) Application is allowed.

¶17

(ii) The substantive sentence imposed upon the applicant is hereby suspended.

¶18

(iii) Applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P. R. bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶19

(iv) Applicant shall report to court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Solapur once in six months on the date assigned by learned Magistrate.

¶20

(v) Upon failure to cause attendance on any two consecutive dates, prosecution would be at liberty to file an application seeking cancellation of bail.

¶21

(vi) Order dated 18/06/2015 is hereby recalled.

¶22

(vii) Application stands disposed of.

¶23

(viii) Parties to act upon authenticated copy of this order.

¶24

(SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.)

ism

3 901.382.15 appr

CERTIFICATE

Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed order.

¶29

ism

Dhanraj Babruwan More v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanraj Babruwan More v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Miss. Tanaz Jahangir Irani . Vs Dr. Siddharth Ambaji Patel and Ors. .

Mr. Kamal Sunder Shahani through His Constituted Attorney, Mr. Santosh Sahani Vs Mrs. Deepika Kamal Shahani Nee Deepika Mahesh Thadani

Gangaram Sambhaji Rane Vs Sumalinj Rajendra Tonse and Anr.

Samir Salimuddin Shaikh and Ors. Vs Hina Kausar Samir Shaikh and Ors.

Dhanraj Babruwan More Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dhanraj Babruwan More Vs the State of Maharashtra