Single judge of the Bombay High Court rejected an application for suspension of sentence to grant bail during pendency of appeal. The court balanced the risk of further victimization against the applicant's youth and sentence served.
Application for suspension of sentence and bail released rejected. Hearing of appeal expedited.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(5)APPANo.4542017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.454 OF 2017 IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.259 OF 2017
Rohit Ramchandra Bhoite ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
Mr.Ashok Mundargi, Senior Counsel i/b. Siddharth Karpe & Arun Khot, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr.Y.M.Nakhwa, APP for the Respondent/State.
CORAM : A.M.BADAR J.
DATED : 11th DECEMBER 2017.
P.C. :
1 This is an application for suspension of sentence and releasing the applicant/accused on bail during pendency of the appeal filed by him, which has already admitted for final hearing.
2 Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant/accused. He pointed out that the substantive sentence of imprisonment is for ten years out of which the applicant/accused has already undergone three years sentence. It is further argued that the appeal may not be heard in near future and, therefore, the applicant, who is also a young boy needs to be
1/4
Gaikwad RD
(5)APPANo.4542017
released on bail during pendency of the appeal. The learned Senior Counsel further argued that considering the nature of injuries and the situation in which the incident took place, prima facie, there was no intention to commit murder of the injured.
3 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the application.
4 I have carefully considered the rival submissions and also perused the copies of depositions placed on record.
5 P.W.No.3 Richa Shinde is the injured. Evidence of P.W.No.11 Dr.Nitin Chavan Medical Officer shows that injuries were suffered by P.W.No.3 Richa in the incident in question. His evidence reflects that following eight injuries suffered by P.W.No.3 Richa Sindhe :
2/4
Gaikwad RD
(5)APPANo.4542017
3/4
Gaikwad RD
(5)APPANo.4542017
The Medical Officer has deposed that injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death if not treated promptly.
6 Perusal of evidence of P.W.No.3 Richa shows that the applicant was making advances towards her right from the time when she was taking education in 10th Std. The incident took place when the injured was taking education in the first year in Engineering College. Therefore, this Court is not assured that, if released on bail, the applicant may not repeat commission of similar offence against the injured in the light of the fact that he was behind her since long. Evidence of the injured shows that the successive blows of knife were given to her by the applicant. At the same time, it is seen that the present applicant is also a young person and he has already undergone three years jail terms. In this view of the matter, the following Order :
4/4
Gaikwad RD
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail by suspending his sentence during the pendency of his appeal.
Whether the risk of the applicant repeating offences against the victim justifies prolongation of his custodial sentence.
Rohit Ramchandra Bhoite
The State of Maharashtra
A.M.Badar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
