Allowed

Pradip Sudhakar Gutte v. The State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC10 Jun 2022IA/1687/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Section 439 CrPC, the High Court suspended the second-degree sentence of imprisonment and granted bail to the applicant pending the disposal of his criminal revision challenging his conviction under Sections 304-A and 279 IPC. The court noted the applicant was on bail during trial and appeal.

What did the court decide?

Suspended the sentence of imprisonment and directed the release of the applicant on bail by executing a bond in Rs. 15,000/ with sureties.

Pradip Sudhakar Gutte Vs The State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

rpa 1/3 23ia1687of2022.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1687 OF 2022

¶4

¶5

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.224 OF 2022

¶6

Pradip Sudhakar Gutte .. Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondents

¶7

…... Mr.Shantanu Kadam i/b. Mr.Gaurav Parkar, Advocate for the Applicant.

¶8

Mr.S.R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent – State.

¶9

CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK J.

¶10

DATED : JUNE 10, 2022.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

This is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail during the pendency of the Revisions Application preferred by the applicant challenging the conviction.

¶13

2 The applicant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 304–A and 279 of IPC by the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Murud, vide judgment and order dated 16^th July, 2015. He was sentenced to suffer imprisonment of one year and six months on each

¶14

rpa 2/3 23ia1687of2022.doc

¶15

count. The said judgment was challenged by preferring Appeal. The Appellate Court i.e. Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge–1, Alibag– Raigad vide judgment and order dated 11^th March, 2022, partly allowed the Appeal, although the conviction was confrmed, the sentence of imprisonment was reduced to one month for conviction under Section 304–A, and, seven days for conviction under Section 279 of IPC.

¶16

3 Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is S.T. driver. The evidence suffers from serious discrepancies, hence, the sentence of imprisonment may be suspended.

¶17

4 Considering the nature of sentence of imprisonment and the fact that the applicant was on bail during trial as well as during the pendency of Appeal, this Application can be allowed.

¶18

5 Hence, I pass the following order:

¶19

:: O R D E R ::

¶20

(i) Interim Application No.1687 of 2022, is allowed;

¶21

rpa 3/3 23ia1687of2022.doc

¶22

(ii) The sentence of imprisonment imposed vide judgment and order dated 16^th July, 2015, passed by J.M.F.C., Murud, which was modifed vide judgment and order dated 11^th March, 2022, passed by Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge–1, Alibag–Raigad, is suspended and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount;

¶23

(iii) Interim Application No.1687 of 2022, stands disposed of.

¶24

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Pradip Sudhakar Gutte v. The State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradip Sudhakar Gutte 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

Dinesh S. Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kashish Anil Bhatia Vs Anil Gopal Bhatia and Ors.

Apsi Merwan Irani (Deceased) by His Lrs and Ors. an Aspi Irani and Ors. Vs Sanjay Ramchandra Vyas and Anr.

Pramod G. Nair Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sudhir Pandurang Sahare Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Asif Liyakatali Siddiqui Vs State of Maharashtra