Application filed by a life convict seeking suspension of sentence and bail pending disposal of criminal appeal during a long hearing delay. Bail granted.
Sentence suspended and applicant enlarged on bail pending hearing and final disposal of the appeal, subject to bond and conditions.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1332 OF 2021
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 414 OF 2021
Sunil Ankush Kamble...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr....Respondents
Mr. Aniket Vagal a/w Mr. Kunal Pednekar & Mr. Divesh Mehani, for
the Applicant.
Mr. V.B.Konde Deshmukh, A.P.P for the Respondent-State.
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
GAURI GODSE, JJ.
DATE : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2023
P.C.:
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2.By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of his
sentence and enlargement on bail, pending the hearing and final
disposal of his aforesaid appeal.
1/6
Wakodikar
3. The applicant, vide Judgment and Order dated 14th
September, 2020, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Mangaon-Raigad in Sessions Case No. 01 of 2019, alongwith another
co-accused, has been convicted as under:-
-
for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a
fine of Rs.50,000/- each, in default, to suffer further rigorous
imprisonment for 2 years;
-
for the offence punishable under Section 397 r/w 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7
years;
-
for the offence punishable under Section 201 r/w 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3
years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default, to suffer
further rigorous imprisonment for 1 year;
All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
4.Perused the papers. The prosecution case entirely rests on
2/6
Wakodikar
the circumstantial evidence. According to PW-1 – Sandip More, father
of deceased – Jagrut, the incident took place on 26th September, 2018.
He has alleged that he had learnt that his son – Jagrut had gone with
Satish More (co-accused). On 27th September, 2018, the dead body of
Jagrut was found. Prior to the said dead body being found, PW-1 –
Sandip More had lodged a missing complaint with the Roha Police
Station, expressing his suspicion on the applicant and co-accused –
Satish More. As far as the applicant is concerned, it is stated by PW-3
– Suraj Shambhunath Singh that he had last seen the deceased Jagrut
with the applicant and Satish More on 26th September, 2018 at about
7.30 p.m.
5.PW-6 – Abhijit Dhumal, in his evidence has stated that the
applicant and Satish More were his regular customers and that they
had come to his hotel on 26th September, 2018, at about 10.15 p.m.
This is all what is stated by this witness.
6.As far as, PW-4 – Nishad Nandkumar Patil is concerned, he
3/6
Wakodikar
has stated that on 26th September, 2018, at about 7.00 p.m., he
alongwith the deceased, Satish More (co-accused) and others were
eating bhel at Warse S.T. Stop and that, the deceased had gone
alongwith Satish (co-accused), however, did not return back. The said
witness i.e. PW4 - Nishad does not speak about the presence of the
applicant at the spot with the deceased, nor with Satish More.
7.According to the prosecution, the applicant showed the
place from where, the branch of a tree was taken, which was used in
the commission of the assault. According to the learned Counsel for
the applicant, the very same spot was also shown by the co-accused -
Satish More, one day prior and as such, the said evidence is not useful
to the prosecution qua the applicant.
8.According to the prosecution, the applicant had sold a gold
chain to another co-accused i.e. accused No.3, however, the said
accused No.3 was acquitted after a full-fledged trial. The motive
alleged is that of committing theft of a gold chain, which led to the
deceased being assaulted. The applicant is in custody since 28th
4/6
Wakodikar
September, 2018, for almost five years.
9.Considering the aforesaid evidence on record and the fact
that the applicant’s appeal is not likely to come up for the hearing in
the immediate near future, the application is allowed and the
applicant’s sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail, pending
the hearing and final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, on the following
terms and conditions:-
ORDER
i)The applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R.Bond
in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;
ii)The applicant shall report to the trial Court, once in four
months on the day/date specified by the trial Court, till the appeal is
finally disposed of;
iii) 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;
5/6
Wakodikar
iv)If there are two consecutive defaults in appearing before
the trial Court, the learned Judge shall make a report to the High
Court and the prosecution would be at liberty to file an application
seeking cancellation of bail.
10.The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
11.All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this
order.
GAURI GODSE, J.
REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
6/6
Wakodikar
Sunil Ankush Kamble
The State of Maharashtra
REVATI MOHITE DERE
GAURI GODSE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court