Allowed

Dilip Gorakh Mali v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC13 Feb 2018APPA/176/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal application, the high court suspended the subjective sentence of imprisonment and ordered the release of the applicant on bail during the pendency of his appeal following consideration of rival submissions and co-accused bail status.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; substantive sentence suspended; release on bail via executing P.R. Bond in Rs.30,000/- with one local surety in like amount.

Dilip Gorakh Mali Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

7-APPA-176-2018.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.176 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.170 OF 2017

¶5

DILIP GORAKH MALI )...APPLICANT

¶6

V/s.

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA )...RESPONDENT

¶8

Mr.Gajanan Savagave, Advocate for the Applicant.

¶9

Mr.S.V.Gavand, APP for the Respondent - State.

¶10

CORAM : A. M. BADAR, J. DATE : 13^th FEBRUARY 2018

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

1 This is an application by the applicant/accused for suspension of sentence and releasing him on bail during pendency of the appeal filed by him. The applicant/accused along with coaccused is convicted of the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years apart from direction to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-.

¶13

avk 1/3

¶14

7-APPA-176-2018.doc

¶15

2 Heard the learned Advocate appearing for the applicant/accused. He argued that co-accused named Balu Mali, Rizwan Khan and Vijay Chavan are already released on bail. Except recovery of a knife, there is no evidence to incriminate the applicant/accused. The co-accused having more serious role has already been released on bail.

¶16

3 The learned APP submits that a knife came to be recovered from the applicant/accused apart from his identification by PW1 Sanjay and PW3 Shubham.

¶17

4 I have carefully considered the rival submissions and

¶18

also perused the orders releasing the co-accused on bail. Short sentence of imprisonment is awarded to the applicant/accused and co-accused with similar role are already released on bail. Considering the pendency of appeals before this court, the appeal filed by the present applicant/accused, who has undergone atleast 1 year of substantive sentence, may not be heard in near future. In this view of the matter, the following order :

avk 2/3

7-APPA-176-2018.doc

ORDER

i) The application is allowed.

¶23

ii) Substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the applicant/accused is suspended and the applicant/accused is ordered to be released on bail on his executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Satara.

¶24

iii)The applicant/accused shall furnish his contact number and his permanent as well as local address, if any, to the Investigating Officer as well as in the bail bond.

¶25

iv)The application is disposed of.

¶26

(A. M. BADAR, J.)

¶27

avk 3/3

Dilip Gorakh Mali v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Gorakh Mali 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

Mohan Bhiku Rajpure Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohan Bhiku Rajpure Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nivrutti Vitthal Punde Vs Vitthal Gabaji Kolhe and Ors.

Suresh Baburao Pardeshi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Devi Hemraj Nakum Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ramesh Veeraswami Naidu @ Anna and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra