Allowed

Tanaji Kashinath Kokare and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC15 Dec 2017APPA/1690/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal application, the Bombay High Court granted suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and directed release on bail for the appellants pending the hearing of their appeal filed against conviction under Sections 379 IPC and 135 of the Indian Electricity Act, imposed by the trial court.

What did the court decide?

The substantive sentence of imprisonment is suspended; applicants are directed to be released on bail by executing a P.R. Bond and furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each.

Tanaji Kashinath Kokare and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

906-appa-1690-17.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1690 OF 2017

¶4

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 925 of 2017

¶6

Tanaji Kashinath Kokare and Ors. …Applicants

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra …Respondent

¶9

Mr. Nitesh Mohite i/b Jaydeep Mane for the appellant.

¶10

Mr. P.P. Jadhav, APP for the State.

¶11

CORAM: A.M. BADAR, J. DATED: 15^th DECEMBER 2017

¶12

PC:-

¶13

This is an application for suspension of sentence and

¶14

releasing the applicant/accused on bail during pendency of the appeal filed by them.

¶15

Heard the learned Advocate appearing for the

¶16

applicant/accused. He argued that short sentence of

¶17

Kavita Page 1 of 3

¶18

906-appa-1690-17.doc

¶19

imprisonment is imposed on the applicants/accused and considering the nature of offence they are entitled for release on bail.

¶20

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent opposed the application by submitting that the applicants should surrender themselves and then seek for bail.

¶21

I have carefully considered the rival submissions and also perused the impugned judgment and order of conviction. The applicants are convicted of offences punishable under Sections 379 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal code and under Section 135 of Indian Electricity Act. For the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, they are sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months and for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act they are sentence to suffer simple imprisonment for one year apart from payment of fine. They are sentenced of imprisonment as imposed on applicants/accused. It is seen

¶22

Kavita Page 2 of 3

¶23

906-appa-1690-17.doc

¶24

that the substantive sentence of imprisonment is already suspended by the learned trial Court convicting them of alleged offences. The appeal filed by them is not likely to be heard in the near future and therefore the order:

¶25

(i) The application is allowed.

¶26

(ii) The substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the applicants/accused is suspended and they are directed to be released on bail on thei executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each and on furnishing surety in the like amount by each of them.

¶27

(A.M. BADAR, J )

¶28

Kavita Page 3 of 3

Tanaji Kashinath Kokare and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tanaji Kashinath Kokare and Ors. 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

Sujit Gopal Kulkarni Vs N. G. Traders and Ors.

Girish R. Bokadia Vs Prithviraj Jogani and Anr.

Vanita Amritlal Shah Vs Bhavin Rameshchandra Kanuga and Anr.

Tanaji Kashinath Kokare and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs Rizwan Shakil Vantamurikar

Popat Shivaji Hajare and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra