Partly allowed

Pravin Suresh Sannake v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC16 Jan 2024IA/12/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court suspended the sentence imposed on the applicant convicted of offences under POCSO and IPC sections. The applicant was released on cash bail of Rs. 15,000 for a period of 8 weeks and directed to report to the trial court periodically.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended and applicant released on bail via P.R. Bond of Rs. 15,000 with one or more sureties in like amount.

Pravin Suresh Sannake Vs State of Maharashtra… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2024)

2024:BHC-AS:1926

902-ia-12-24.docx

Darshan Patil

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 12 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2024

¶6

PRAVIN SURESH SANNAKE ..APPLICANT VS.

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS

¶8

Adv. Umesh Pawar a/w Adv. Akhil Kupade for the Applicant. Ms. S.D. Shinde, APP for the State.

¶9

CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶10

DATE : JANUARY 16, 2024

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

1. This is an application for suspension of sentence. The applicant has been convicted by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 354-A(i), 354-D and 452 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereafter referred to as “POCSO Act”).

¶13

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the

¶14

applicant was in pre-trial custody for almost 2 months. The applicant has been sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years

¶15

and a fine. The fine amount has been paid. Substantive

¶16

1 / 3

¶17

Darshan Patil 902-ia-12-24.docx sentences are ordered to run concurrently. The sentence imposed by the trial Court was suspended for enabling the applicant to file the appeal. However, the same was not filed within the stipulated time and therefore, the applicant was arrested on 14/01/2024.

¶18

3. Learned APP opposed the application contending that

¶19

for a serious offence under the POCSO Act, the applicant has been convicted.

¶20

4. It is prayed that the appeal be heard. However, considering the pendency it is not possible to give priority to this appeal. The appeal is unlikely to be heard soon. Considering the duration of the sentence imposed and under the facts and circumstances of the present case and as the applicant was on bail during the trial, I am inclined to suspend the sentence. Hence, the following order.

¶21

ORDER

¶22

a) The sentence is suspended.

¶23

b) The applicant- Pravin Suresh Sannake shall be

¶24

released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one or more sureties in the like

2 / 3

902-ia-12-24.docx

Darshan Patil

amount.

c) The applicant is permitted to furnish cash bail surety in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- for a period of 8 weeks in lieu of surety.

¶30

d) The applicant shall report to the trial Court once in six months, i.e. first Monday of the concerned month, between 2.30 p.m. and 3.30 p.m. commencing February 2024.

¶31

5. The interim application is disposed of in the above terms.

¶32

(M. S. KARNIK, J.)

¶33

3 / 3

Pravin Suresh Sannake v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pravin Suresh Sannake v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Satish Mohanrao Patil Vs Rupali Satish Patil and Ors.

Rajesh Bhagwan Bobade Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sachin Raghunath Toke Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Maharashtra Tank Lorry Owners vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Virendra Devidas Doke Vs the Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.

M/S. Rainbow Iron and Steel Vs M/S. Chevron Metal Products Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.