Allowed

Dipak Raghunath Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC23 Sept 2021APPLN/1994/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court at Aurangabad allowed a criminal application seeking suspension of a seven-year rigorous imprisonment sentence and bail. The court relied on precedent to note that suspension should be considered liberally when an appeal requires a long time to hear, even if the conviction relies on the informant's evidence, factually contested by the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Sentence for seven years rigorous imprisonment suspended; applicant released on secured bail with ₹15,000 surety bond and restrictions on visiting complainant and tampering with witnesses.

Dipak Raghunath Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

Cri. Appln. No.1994-2021.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1994 OF 2021 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 428 OF 2021

¶5

Dipak Raghunath Patil, Age : 32 Years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o. At/Post Talai, Tq. Erandol, District Jalgaon.

¶6

.. APPLICANT

¶7

V E R S U S

¶8

The State of Maharashtra, Through Bhadgaon Police Station, Tal. Bhadgon, District Jalgaon.

¶9

.. RESPONDENT

¶10

Advocate for the Applicant : Mr. S.P. Brahme A.P.P for Respondent- State : Mr. R. B. Bagul

¶11

CORAM : SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J. DATE : 23.09.2021

¶12

PER COURT :-

¶13

This is application for bail and suspension of sentence imposed on applicant in Sessions Case No. 235 of 2019 whereby he was sentenced to sufer R.I for seven years. It is contended that the applicant was prosecuted at the instance of his wife who alleged that, applicant, with intent to kill her, pushed into the well. But surprisingly she was survived in the said incident, hence she lodged First Information Report.

¶14

¶15

Cri. Appln. No.1994-2021.odt

¶16

On due investigation, the charge sheet came to be fled against the applicant. He was tried before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Session Case No. 235 of 2019, wherein he has been sentenced to sufer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fne of Rs. 3,000/( Rupees Three Thousand). In default of payment of fne amount, he was directed to undergo the simple imprisonment for two months.

¶17

It is contended that, after investigation, the applicant was released on bail. He never misused his liberty while on bail. The prosecution has heavily relied on the evidence of the informant who is wife of applicant. It is contended that, the alleged incident had occurred on 10^th April 2018, but First Informant Report came to be fled on 12.04.2018. It is contended that, after the incident, the parents of the informant had visited the house of the applicant. They stayed in his house, but no prompt action was taken by them or the informant. It is contended that, the trial Court should not have believed the evidence of the informant but unfortunately the evidence is relied upon by the trial Court and convicted the applicant. It is contended that, the

¶18

¶19

Cri. Appln. No.1994-2021.odt

¶20

independent witness is also examined but he does not speak about the alleged act of the applicant, namely pushing the informant into the well. It is also contended that, the applicant himself rescued the informant by pulling her out of the well, therefore, the entire incident appears to be false and has concocted. It is contended that, there is no possibility of early hearing of this appeal, therefore the substantial sentence be suspended and the applicant be released on bail till fnal disposal of the appeal.

¶21

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He submitted that, there is sufcient evidence against the applicant to involve him for the ofence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The evidence of the informant is clinching, therefore, application be rejected.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Perused the evidence of the informant. She has categorically stated that, Sanjay Patil and her husband climbed down into the well and rescued her. She also admitted that she did not sustain any injury. After

¶23

¶24

Cri. Appln. No.1994-2021.odt

¶25

the incident, she stayed in the house of the applicant. She also admitted that, on the day of the incident her father and brother had visited her matrimonial house and they stayed overnight and then he went along with them. But surprisingly neither the informant nor father and brother of the informant lodged prompt First Information Report against the applicant about the alleged incident. She further admitted that, she contacted the maternal uncle of the applicant and with his help she lodged First Information Report. She also admitted that, in the police station she had discussed with her father and brother and one Narayan Patil and thereafter she lodged the First Information Report. On going through above admission, it appears that, the evidence of the informant is required to be re-appreciated in appeal. It may take a long time to hear the appeal preferred by the applicant. Therefore, the prayer of the applicant is required to be considered. On this point, learned counsel for the applicant has relied on the ratio laid down in the case of

¶26

Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai And Others Vs. State of Gujarat (1999) 4 Supreme Court Cases 421 wherein it was held that :

¶27

‘’ When a convicted person is sentenced to a

¶28

¶29

Cri. Appln. No.1994-2021.odt

¶30

fxed period of sentence and when he fles an appeal under statutory right, suspension of sentence can be considered by the appellate Court liberally unless there are exceptional circumstances. Of course, if there is any statutory restriction against suspension of sentence it is a diferent matter. Similarly, when the sentence is life imprisonment the consideration for suspension of sentence could be of a diferent approach. But if for any reason the sentence of a limited duration cannot be suspended every endeavour should be made to dispose of the appeal on merit more so when a motion for expeditious hearing of the appeal is made in such cases. Otherwise the very valuable right of appeal would be an exercise in futility by efux of time. When the appellate court fnds that due to practical reasons such appeals cannot be disposed of expeditiously the appellate court must bestow special concern in the matter of suspending the sentence. So as to make the appeal right, meaningful and efective. Of course, appellate courts can impose similar conditions when bail is granted. ‘’

¶31

In present case also the applicant has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years. He was enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial. There are no allegations against the applicant that he misused the liberty

¶32

¶33

Cri. Appln. No.1994-2021.odt

¶34

granted to him. The informant is not residing with the applicant. She resides at her parental home. The apprehension of threatening can be taken care of by imposing certain conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order :-

¶35

O R D E R

¶36

(i) The application is hereby allowed.

¶37

(ii) The substantive sentence awarded to the applicant Dipak Raghunath Patil in Sessions Case No. 235 of 2019, by learned Additional Sessions Judge Jalgaon, on 2308-2021, is hereby suspended till the fnal hearing and disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 428 of 2021.

¶38

(iii) He be released on PR and SB of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with one or more solvent sureties.

¶39

(iv) The applicant/appellant shall not visit the village of the informant.

¶40

(iv) The applicant shall not tamper or threaten to the informant and other witnesses, in any manner, whatsoever, during the pendency of present appeal.

¶41

(v) Bail before the trial Court.

¶42

( SURENDRA P. TAVADE ) JUDGE

¶43

ysk

Dipak Raghunath Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dipak Raghunath Patil 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikas Madan Devkate Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sukhdeo Mahadu Aaher and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Amol S/O. Ambadasrao Jain Vs the State of Maharashtra

Krishna Sahebrao Patil Dongaonkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Shaikh Juber S/O. Shaikh Saheblal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shaikh Rashidabee Shaikh Kadu Vs the State of Maharashtra