Allowed

Jaylaxmi Vijaykumar Gurav v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC11 Sept 2023IA/2165/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an interim application by a convicted appellant seeking suspension of her life sentence and release on bail. The court considered the reliance on circumstantial evidence and the inconclusive scientific reports supporting the prosecution case before granting bail on standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Suspend sentence and enlarge applicant on bail pending disposal of appeal.

Jaylaxmi Vijaykumar Gurav Vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-AS:26923-DB

¶2

ia 2165-2023.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2165 OF 2023

¶5

IN

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 875 OF 2023

¶7

Jaylaxmi Vijaykumar Gurav...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondents

¶8

Mr. Amit Mane for the Applicant.

¶9

Mr. K.V.Saste, A.P.P for the Respondent-State.

¶10

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
 GAURI GODSE, JJ.
 DATE : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

¶13

2.By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of her
sentence and enlargement on bail, pending the hearing and final
disposal of her aforesaid appeal.

¶14

Wakodikar

¶15

1/5

¶16

ia 2165-2023.doc

¶17

3. The applicant, vide Judgment and Order dated 25th
August, 2022 and 29th August, 2022, passed by the learned Sessions
Judge, Sindhudurg at Oros, in Sessions Case No. 05 of 2018, has
been convicted alongwith other co-accused as under:-

¶18

-
for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the
Indian Penal Code, to suffer life imprisonment and to
pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- each, in default, to suffer simple
imprisonment for 15 days;

¶19

-
for the offence punishable under Section 201 r/w 34
of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment
for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each, in default,
to suffer simple imprisonment for 5 days;

¶20

All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

¶21

4.The applicant was however, acquitted of the offence
punishable under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

5.Perused the papers. The prosecution case rests entirely on

¶23

2/5

¶24

Wakodikar

¶25

ia 2165-2023.doc

¶26

circumstantial evidence. According to the prosecution, the applicant
was having an extra-marital affair with co-accused No.1, pursuant to
which, both, the applicant and the co-accused murdered the deceased
i.e. the applicant’s husband – Vijaykumar. As far as the applicant is
concerned, the prosecution has relied on the evidence of PW-8 –
Bhimrao Kallappa Kambale to prove the circumstance of last seen as
against the applicant. We having perused the evidence of PW-8 –
Bhimrao, do not find that the said evidence, in any way, prove the
circumstance of last seen, as against the applicant. As far as extra-
judicial-confession is concerned, the same is alleged to have been made
by co-accused No.1. As far as, finding of blood stains in the house is
concerned, the Chemical Analyser’s Report shows that the blood
group is inconclusive. It is a matter of record, that although the
incident is alleged to have taken place on 5th November, 2017, the
dead body of the deceased was found on 11th November, 2017, after
4-5 days of the alleged incident.

¶27

6.Considering the evidence on record and considering that

¶28

3/5

¶29

Wakodikar

¶30

ia 2165-2023.doc

¶31

the applicant, a lady, is in custody since 2017, the application is
allowed and the applicant’s sentence is suspended and she is enlarged
on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of the aforesaid appeal,
on the following terms and conditions:-

¶32

ORDER

¶33

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;

¶34

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;

¶35

iii) The applicant shall keep the trial Court informed of her
current address and mobile contact number and/or change of
residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time;

¶36

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.

¶37

4/5

¶38

Wakodikar

¶39

ia 2165-2023.doc

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

order.

¶43

GAURI GODSE, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶44

5/5

¶45

Wakodikar

Jaylaxmi Vijaykumar Gurav v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaylaxmi Vijaykumar Gurav v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishwas Janardan Salunkhe Vs State of Maharashtra

Laxman Prabhu Wagh Vs State of Maharashtra

Snehal Shashikant Gawali Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sunil Ankush Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ganpat Vanchaji Dolas Vs State of Maharashtra

Nailesh Mukesh Patel Vs U. T. of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Anr.