Siddhesh Shantaram Dagale vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Siddhesh Shantaram Dagale vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Sentence imposed by the trial Court (Judgment and Order dated 8 July 2025, Sessions Case No.1422 of 2019) suspended for the pendency of the Appeal and Applicant released on bail on furnishing a PR Bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two local sureties; subject to conditions: monthly attendance at Mulund Police Station, Mumbai on the first Monday of each month between 10.00 a.m. and 01.00 p.m. initially for one year and thereafter on the first Monday of every third calendar month (four times a year) till disposal of the Appeal; furnishing of prospective residential address to Mulund Police Station and the trial Court; providing mobile and/or landline contact numbers; two consecutive defaults attracting cancellation-of-bail provisions.

Issue for consideration

Whether the sentence imposed on the Applicant (original accused No.2) in Sessions Case No.1422 of 2019 should be suspended and the Applicant released on bail during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 944 of 2025, on the ground of parity with co-accused A. No. 3 who had already been granted bail by this Court.

Ratio / Principle

On perusal of record, the role attributed to the Applicant is same and/or similar to that of co-accused Suraj Pramod Salve (A. No. 3); in fact the Applicant did not assault PW No.1 with the wooden log.

Key takeaways

The Court decided to suspend the sentence imposed upon the Applicant and release him on bail during the pendency of his Appeal.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Coram: A. S. Gadkari & Kamal Khata, JJ. (P.C. dated 5th March 2026). Interim Application No. 4755 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 944 of 2025 — Applicant Siddhesh Shantaram Dagale, original accused No.2, sought suspension of the sentence imposed by the trial Court's Judgment and Order dated 8th July 2025 in Sessions Case No.1422 of 2019 and release on bail during the pendency of the Appeal, on parity with co-accused Suraj Pramod Salve @ Bhurji (A. No. 3), who had been released on bail by this Court's Order dated 10th November 2025 despite a greater attributed role; the learned APP conceded parity. The Court found the Applicant's role same and/or similar to that of A. No. 3 and observed that the Applicant did not assault PW No.1 with the wooden log, and granted the Application. Conditions: PR Bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two local sureties; monthly presence at Mulund Police Station, Mumbai (first Monday, 10.00 a.m.–01.00 p.m.), initially for one year and thereafter once every third calendar month till disposal of the Appeal; prospective residential address to be furnished to Mulund Police Station and the trial Court; mobile/landline numbers to be provided; two consecutive defaults attract cancellation-of-bail provisions.

DTG 16-Ia-4755-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4755 OF 2025 IN

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 944 OF 2025

Siddhesh Shantaram Dagale

… Applicant

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

… Respondents

Mr. Misbaah A. Solkar a/w Mr. Amin Solkar, Ms. Sejal Jain, Mr. Mohd. Taha and Mr. Mohammed Juned for Applicant.

Mr. Ajay S. Patil, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.

Ms. Prachi M. Bhagat, WPSI, Mulund Police Station, present.

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND KAMAL KHATA, JJ. DATE : 5^th March 2026

P.C. :

This is an Application for suspension of sentence and releasing

the Applicant on bail, during the pendency of Appeal. The Applicant is original accused No.2.

Heard Ms. Solkar, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Patil, learned APP for Respondent, State. Perused record.

Mr. Solkar, submitted that, the co-accused namely Suraj Pramod Salve @ Bhurji (A. No. 3), who has been attributed with greater role than the

Applicant has been released on bail by this Court by its Order dated 10^th

1/3

DTG 16-Ia-4755-2025.doc

November 2025. She submitted that, the role attributed to the Applicant is much lesser than attributed to Suraj Pramod Salve (A. No. 3) and therefore the Applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

Mr. Patil, learned APP fairly conceded to the fact that, the Applicant is entitled to have parity with co-accused Suraj Pramod Salve @ Bhurji (A. No. 3).

Perusal of record indicates that, the role attributed to the Applicant is same and/or similar to that of Suraj Pramod Salve (A. No. 3) Salve. In fact the Applicant did not assault to PW No.1 with the wooden log.

In view of the above, we are inclined to suspend the sentence imposed upon the Applicant and release him on bail during the pendency of his Appeal.

Hence, the following Order :-

[i] During the pendency of Appeal preferred by the Applicant, the sentence imposed upon the Applicant by the trial Court by its Judgment and Order dated 8^th July, 2025, passed in Sessions Case No.1422 of 2019, is suspended and the Applicant is released on bail on his furnishing PR bond of Rs.50,000/with one or two local sureties to make up the said amount.

[ii] After his release from jail, the Applicant shall attend Mulund Police Station, Mumbai, on every first Monday of each month between 10.00 a.m. and 01.00 p.m. and mark his presence

2/3

DTG 16-Ia-4755-2025.doc

initially for a period of one year and thereafter on every first Monday between 10.00 a.m. and 01.00 p.m. of every third calender month i.e. four times in a year till the disposal of Appeal.

[iii] Before his actual release from jail, the Applicant shall furnish his prospective residential address to the Mulund Police Station, Mumbai, so also to the trial Court.

[iv] Applicant shall also give his mobile phone number and/or landline phone number, on which he can be contacted by the police.

[v] Any two consecutive defaults in complying with the aforestated conditions will attract the provisions of cancellation of bail.

1. Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

3/3