Allowed¶23

Vijaypal Vate Kanojiya v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC7 Apr 2025IA/3972/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: suspension of sentence; bail pending appeal; interim application; Bombay High Court; Atrocity Special Case; Sections 363, 366-A IPC; Section 376 (2)(n) IPC; Additional Sessions Judge Kalyan; conviction dated 26th July 2024; five years rigorous imprisonment; applicant on bail during trial; one year four months undergone; appeal not likely to be heard soon; PR bond Rs.25,000/-; one or two sureties; applicant father of co-accused; Criminal Appeal No.1079 of 2024; N.R. Borkar J.; order dated 02.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of the substantive sentence of rigorous imprisonment for five years and release of the Applicant on bail on furnishing a PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No.1079 of 2024. ¶23

Vijaypal Vate Kanojiya vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether, during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No.1079 of 2024 against his conviction, the Applicant's substantive sentence should be suspended and he be released on bail.

¶9

Court's answer

The Court recorded that the fact of the Applicant having been on bail during the trial was not disputed.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the pendency of criminal appeals, the Applicant's appeal was not likely to be taken up for final hearing in the near future, and he had already undergone sentence of one year and four months.

¶17

Key takeaways

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the Court was inclined to suspend the sentence and release the Applicant on bail.ratio¶17
The substantive sentence imposed upon the Applicant by the trial court was suspended and he was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction (N.R. Borkar, J.; 02.09.2025) — Interim Application No.3972 of 2024 in Criminal Appeal No.1079 of 2024, Vijaypal Vate Kanojiya v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.: suspension of sentence and bail pending appeal granted. The Applicant stood convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan by judgment and order dated 26th July 2024 in Atrocity Special Case No.22 of 2015 for offences under Sections 363, 366-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years. Grounds recorded: the Applicant was on bail throughout the trial (fact not disputed); he had already undergone one year and four months of sentence; and, given the pendency of criminal appeals, his appeal was not likely to reach final hearing in the near future. Substantive sentence suspended; Applicant released on PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. Counsel for the State and Respondent No.2 had opposed, submitting that the Applicant is the father of a co-accused convicted under Section 376 (2)(n) IPC and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment, and that considering the nature of the offence the sentence ought not be suspended.

¶1

1 25-IA 3972-24.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3972 OF 2024 IN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1079 OF 2024

¶5

Vijaypal Vate Kanojiya … Applicant (Org. Accused) V/s. State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents

¶6

Mr. Toni S. Sachdevani, Kailash G. Chhabria (through VC) is present. Mr. V. N. Sagare, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Shantanu Kadam for Respondent No.2.

¶7

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 02ND SEPTEMBER 2025

¶8

P.C. :

¶9

By this Application, the Applicant is seeking suspension of sentence

¶10

and grant of bail during the pendency of Appeal filed by him against the judgment and order dated 26^th July 2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan in Atrocity Special Case No.22 of 2015 by which the Learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the present Applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years.

¶11

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has

1 of 3

Mugdha

2 25-IA 3972-24.doc

good case on merits. It is submitted that the Applicant was on bail during the trial. It is submitted that till date, the Applicant has undergone sentence of one year and four months and the appeal is not likely to be taken up for final hearing. It is submitted that thus the sentence be suspended and the Applicant be released on bail.

¶16

On the other hand, Learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 submit that the Applicant is the father of one of the co-accused to whom the trial Court has convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 (2)(n) and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years. It is submitted that considering the nature of offence, the sentence may not be suspended.

¶17

The fact that the Applicant was on bail during the trial is not disputed. Considering the pendency of criminal appeals, the Appeal filed by the Applicant is not likely to be taken up for final hearing in near future. The Applicant has already undergone sentence of one year and four months. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am inclined to suspend the sentence and release the Applicant on bail.

¶18

The substantive sentence imposed upon the Applicant by the trial

2 of 3

Mugdha

3 25-IA 3972-24.doc

court is suspended. The Applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶23

The Interim Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶24

(N.R. BORKAR, J.)

¶25

3 of 3

¶26

Mugdha

Vijaypal Vate Kanojiya v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijaypal Vate Kanojiya v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Lakhan Bhagwat Mane vs the State of Maharashtra

Chetan Pandit Narote vs Devendra Rajesh Kothe

Vishnu Sarjappa Pirapgol @ Kamble and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra

Sachin Govind Walke vs the State of Maharashtra

Balshiram Dagadu Thite vs State of Maharashtra

Prakash Sopan Mundhe vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.