Allowed¶25

Charan Premsing Sulawane v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC6 Jan 2026APPLN/4183/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Charan Premsing Sulawane v. State of Maharashtra; Criminal Application No. 4183 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal (ST) No. 11653 of 2025; Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench; Rajnish R. Vyas, J.; 27-01-2026; condonation of delay of 799 days in filing appeal against conviction; offences under Ss. 376(2)(m), 354(D)(1)(i), 337, 324, 341, 346, 365, 366, 323, 504, 506 IPC; maximum sentence fourteen years rigorous imprisonment; applicant in jail; conviction causes stigma; application allowed; appeal to be registered.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay of 799 days in filing the appeal against conviction; appeal to be registered. ¶25

Charan Premsing Sulawane vs the State of Maharashtra and Another — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

15-APPLN-4183-25.odt

¶2

2026:BHC-AUG:3436

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4183 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO. 11653 OF 2025

¶5

Charan Premsing Sulawane VERSUS

¶6

..APPLICANT

¶7

State of Maharashtra and Another

¶8

..RESPONDENTS

¶9

Ms. K.M. Salve, Advocate h/f Ms. A.N. Pedgaonkar, Advocate for applicant Ms. U.S. Bhosale, A.P.P. for respondent no.1 – State Mr. R.M. Gaikwad, Advocate for respondent no.2 (appointed)

¶10

CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. DATE : 27^th JANUARY, 2026

¶11

PER COURT :

¶12

. This is an application for condonation of delay of 799 days in filing appeal against conviction. The applicant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 376(2)(m) of the I.P.C. and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for fourteen years and pay fine of Rs.10,000/-.

¶13

The applicant was also convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 354(D)(1)(i) of the I.P.C. and directed to suffer simple imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-.

¶14

For commission of offence punishable under Section 337 of the I.P.C. fine of Rs.500/- was imposed, whereas for commission of offence

¶15

1 / 3

¶16

15-APPLN-4183-25.odt

¶17

punishable under Section 324 of the I.P.C. simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.1,000/- was imposed. For commission of offence punishable under Section 341 of the I.P.C., fine of Rs.500/- was imposed, whereas for commission of offence punishable under Section 346 of the I.P.C., six months simple imprisonment was imposed.

¶18

The applicant was also convicted for offences punishable under Sections 365, 366, 323, 504 and 506 of the I.P.C. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The maximum sentence imposed is of fourteen years.

¶19

In this background, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that since appellant is in jail, he could not prefer appeal because lack of communication and he was not having financial resources.

¶20

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the application on the ground that delay is not explained properly and it is not bonafide. It is further stated by her that the reasons given by the trial Court are just and proper.

¶21

Even learned counsel for Respondent No.2 / victim has opposed the application on the similar grounds.

¶22

2 / 3

¶23

15-APPLN-4183-25.odt

¶24

I have gone through the record of the case. The maximum sentence imposed to suffer imprisonment is of fourteen years. Though there is delay of 799 days, the fact remains that the applicant is in jail, and therefore, could not immediately approach the learned counsel. As conviction will cause stigma on the applicant, I am inclined to allow the application.

¶25

In that view of the matter, criminal application is allowed. Delay of 799 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Appeal be registered.

¶26

( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. )

¶27

SSD

¶28

3 / 3

Charan Premsing Sulawane v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Charan Premsing Sulawane v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

The Collector , Nagpur, Special Land Acquisition Officer, Nagpur vs Arun S/O Shiv Godghate and Others

Shital Digamber Taak vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Sakharkheda , Dist. Buldhana

Arbaz Ahemad Farooque Ahemad vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Pradip Vitthal Gade and Another vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajendra Bhimrao Aswar and Others vs the State of Maharashtra

Laxman Bhaskar Havane and Other vs the State of Maharashtra and Another