Basavraj Dhondappa Chougule Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2025)

Basavraj Dhondappa Chougule Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Sentence suspended; applicant enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; applicant to be present when the appeal is heard finally; appeal listed for final hearing on 21st November, 2025; application disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant's sentence should be suspended and he enlarged on bail pending the hearing and final disposal of Criminal Appeal No.114 of 2019.

Court's answer

Having regard to the applicant's custody of more than ten years (since 16th August, 2015) and the improbability of hearing the appeal at an early date, the Court inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the applicant on bail, while listing the appeal for final hearing on 21st November, 2025.

Ratio / Principle

The application is allowed: the applicant's sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail on conditions — furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, and remaining present when the appeal is heard finally; the application is disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Interim Application No.568 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal No.114 of 2019 (High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur; Coram M.S. Karnik & Sharmila U. Deshmukh, JJ.; decided 17th September, 2025) — Suspension of sentence and bail. The applicant, convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur in Sessions Case No.256 of 2015 (judgment dated 3rd November, 2018) under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (life imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/-) and under sections 3 and 5 of the Arms Act, 1959 (rigorous imprisonment three years and fine of Rs.500/- each), all sentences running concurrently, sought suspension of sentence and enlargement on bail pending disposal of his appeal. He had been in custody since 16th August, 2015, i.e., for more than ten years. Counsel for the applicant relied on Suleman v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2022) 19 Supreme Court Cases 660; the A.P.P. opposed, urging that the appeal be heard finally as the conviction rested on two eye witnesses. Finding it not possible to hear the appeal at an early date, the Court listed the appeal for final hearing on 21st November, 2025, suspended the applicant's sentence and enlarged him on bail on a P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, conditioning his presence at the final hearing. Application allowed and disposed of.

915-IA-568-2025.doc

Shailaja

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.568 OF 2025 IN

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.114 OF 2019

Basavraj Dhondappa Chougule ] Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ] Respondent

Ms. Gayatri Kulkarni a/w Ms. Shivani A. Veer i/b Ms. Vrushali L. Maindad, for Applicant.

Mr. Anand Shalgaonkar, A.P.P, for Respondent – State.

Ms. Madhuri More, Superintendent of Jail, Kolhapur Central Jail present.

Mr. Shreedhar Hari Kumbhar, Peon, Kolhapur Central Prison Kolhapur present.

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK & SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ

DATE : 17^th SEPTEMBER, 2025.

P.C:

Heard Ms. Kulkarni, learned Counsel for the applicant and Mr.

Shalgaonkar, learned A.P.P, for Respondent – State.

1 of 4

SHAILAJASHRIKANT Digitally signed by SHAILAJASHRIKANT HALKUDEDate: 2025.09.17 18:42:52 HALKUDE +0530

915-IA-568-2025.doc

By this Interim Application, the applicant seeks suspension of his sentence and enlargement on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of the appeal.

The applicant vide judgment and order dated 3^rd November, 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur in Sessions Case No.256 of 2015 has been convicted and sentenced as under:

(a) for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months.

(b) for the offence punishable under section 3 of the Arms Act sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.

(c) for the offence punishable under sections 5 of the Arms Act, 1959 sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three moths. All the aforesaid sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2 of 4

915-IA-568-2025.doc

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that fine amount has been paid.

The Applicant-accused had committed murder of deceased Vinayak. It is the case of the prosecution that applicant’s daughter had an affair with deceased Vinayak which was not liked by the applicant.

While opposing the bail application, it is submitted by learned A.P.P that the appeal itself should be heard finally as conviction is based on the evidence of two eye witnesses apart from other materials.

Learned Counsel for the applicant has relied on a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Suleman Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2022) 19 Supreme Court Cases, 660 .

The applicant is in custody with effect from 16^th August, 2015 i.e for more than ten years. Considering the present situation, it may not be possible for us to hear the appeal itself at an early date though an endeavour would be made by us to hear the appeal itself finally on 21^st November, 2025. List the Appeal for final hearing on 21^st November, 2025. However, we are inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the applicant on bail.

The application is allowed and the applicant’s sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail on following conditions;

3 of 4

915-IA-568-2025.doc

: O R D E R :

(a) 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.

(b) The applicant shall be present when the appeal is heard finally.

The application is disposed of.

[SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]

[M.S. KARNIK, J.]

4 of 4