Disposed¶31

Sanjiv Jagmohan Varma v. Vidhya Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd.

Bombay HC13 Jan 2026IA/5428/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suspension of sentence and interim bail pending disposal of Criminal Revision Application No. 385 of 2024; Section 138 N.I. Act conviction; six months simple imprisonment; compensation Rs.37,00,000/-; P.R. Bond Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties; trial Court had suspended sentence till appeal period; no misuse of bail during trial; Bombay High Court, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction; Judge Shivkumar Dige; Interim Application No. 5428 of 2024; applicants/respondents: Sanjiv J. Varma v. Vidhya Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.; Interim Application stands disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended; applicant enlarged on bail pending hearing and final disposal of the revision on furnishing a P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, the bail bond to be furnished before the Trial Court. ¶31

Sanjiv Jagmohan Varma vs Vidhya Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd. — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant's sentence should be suspended and he be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the criminal revision application filed by him.

¶13

Court's answer

The applicant's sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of the revision, on stated terms and conditions.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

Ground relied on: the maximum sentence imposed on the applicant is six months, and the trial Court has already suspended the sentence till the appeal period.

¶22

Key takeaways

Further grounds relied on: the applicant was on bail throughout the trial and did not misuse the liberty, and it may take time to dispose of the revision.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction), Interim Application No. 5428 of 2024 in Criminal Revision Application No. 385 of 2024 — Shivkumar Dige, J., 10 February 2026. Applicant Sanjiv J. Varma, convicted by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced to six months' simple imprisonment plus Rs.37,00,000/- compensation (in default, further four months' simple imprisonment), sought suspension of sentence and bail during the pendency of his revision application. Noting that the maximum sentence imposed was six months, the trial Court had already suspended sentence till the appeal period, the applicant had been on bail throughout trial without misusing the liberty, and the revision may take time to dispose of, the Judge suspended the sentence and enlarged the applicant on bail pending hearing and final disposal of the revision on a P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, the bail bond to be furnished before the Trial Court. Interim Application stands disposed of.

¶1

93-ia5428-24doc

¶2

vai

¶3

Digitally IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY signed by VASANT CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION VASANT ANANDRAO ANANDRAO IDHOL IDHOL Date: 2026.02.12 20:05:03 INTERIM APPLICATION NO.5428 OF 2024 +0530

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.5428 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.385 OF 2024

¶5

Sanjiv J. Varma ...Applicant V/s.

¶6

Vidhya Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

¶7

Mr.Ashok Bhatia for the Applicant.

¶8

Mr.Ashish Dubey for Respondent No.1.

¶9

Mrs.R.D. Humane, APP for the Respondent – State.

¶10

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 10TH FEBRUARY, 2026.

¶11

P.C. :-

¶12

By this application, the applicant is seeking suspension

¶13

of sentence and bail during the pendency of revision application filed by the applicant.

¶14

The applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced to suffer

¶15

simple imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of

¶16

1/3

¶17

93-ia5428-24doc

¶18

Rs.37,00,000/- and in default of payment further simple imprisonment for four months.

¶19

It is the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the trial Court has granted bail and suspended his sentence for appeal period. During trial, the applicant was on bail and he has not misused liberty. Hence, requested to allow the application.

¶20

The learned APP for respondent-State strongly objected to allow the application.

¶21

I have heard both learned counsel.

¶22

The maximum sentence imposed on the applicant is of six months. The trial Court has suspended sentence till appeal period. During trial, the applicant was on bail and he has not misused liberty. It may take time to dispose of the revision.

¶23

In view of above, the applicant’s sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of the revision, on the following terms and conditions.

ORDER

2/3

93-ia5428-24doc