Allowed

Sandip Sidram Shedjale v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC10 Aug 2021IA/1857/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal interim application, the High Court of Bombay suspended the applicant's sentence and enlarged him on bail pending the hearing and disposal of a pending criminal revision application in a Section 498-A case.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended and applicant enlarged on bail with one or two sureties of Rs. 10,000/- pending hearing of the revision application.

Sandip Sidram Shedjale Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

NISHA SANDEEP Digitally signed by NISHASANDEEP CHITNIS CHITNIS Date: 2021.08.12 14:21:13+0530

¶2

16-ia.1857.2021.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1857 OF 2021 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 148 OF 2021

¶5

Sandip Sidram Shedjale ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents

¶6

Mr. Vinod P. Sangvikar, for the Applicant.

¶7

Mr. A. D. Kamkhedkar, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1 – State.

¶8

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶9

DATE : 10^th AUGUST, 2021

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of his sentence, pending the hearing and final disposal of the aforesaid Revision Application.

¶13

The applicant vide Judgment and Order dated 21^st January 2019, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pune in Regular Criminal Case No.2739 of 2014, has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The said

¶14

1/3

¶15

16-ia.1857.2021.doc

¶16

Judgment and Order was confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Criminal Appeal No.77 of 2019, vide Judgment and Order dated 16^th March 2021.

¶17

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was on bail pending trial as well as during the pendency of his appeal and that he has not misused or abused the conditions of bail. He submits that the applicant sanguine to succeed in the same. The Revision has been admitted by a separate order passed today. The same is not likely to be heard in the immediate near future.

¶18

Considering the aforesaid, the application is allowed and the applicant’s sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of his Revision Application, on the following terms and conditions :-

¶19

ORDER

¶20

i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; ii) The Applicant shall keep the trial Court informed of his current address and mobile contact number and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time.

¶21

2/3

¶22

16-ia.1857.2021.doc

¶23

The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶24

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶25

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶26

3/3

Sandip Sidram Shedjale v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandip Sidram Shedjale v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shailendra Kumar Karmawat Vs the State of Maharashtra

Laxman Mahadev Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mehmoodali Sharafatali Sayyed Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahfooz Alam Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pratik Developers Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Amit Indranarayan Pandey Vs the State of Maharashtra