Rajeev Khandelwal vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2018 Latest Caselaw 1238 Bom

Sherla V.


                                                                              appr.497.2018_910.doc


                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                         CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.497 OF 2018
                                          IN
                     CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.528 OF 2018
                                        WITH
                     CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.528 OF 2018

            Rajeev Khandelwal                                                      ... Applicant
                       Vs.
            The State of Maharashtra & anr.                                 ... Respondents


            Mr.V.P. Sawant with Mr.Veerdhaval Kakade and Prabhakar Jadhav
            for the Applicant
            Ms.Rutuja Ambekar, APP, for the Respondent - State

                                                CORAM: Mrs.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

DATED: OCTOBER 10, 2018

P.C.:

1. Heard.

2. Criminal Revision is admitted.

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.528 OF 2018

3. This application is moved for bail and for suspension of the

substantive sentence whereby the applicant/accused was

convicted vide the impugned order dated 12.4.2017 passed by the

learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai

in C.C. No.5953/SS/2015 for a period of 1 year with an order of

appr.497.2018_910.doc

compensation. The applicant/accused had filed the Criminal

Appeal No.341 of 2017 against the said order. However, the said

appeal was dismissed by judgment and order dated 13.8.2018

passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and

Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai. Pursuant to that order, the trial

Court has issued a warrant of conviction.

4. Yesterday, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

applicant/accused had made a statement that the

applicant/accused was not yet arrested till yesterday and it was

submitted that the applicant/accused would remain present before

the trial Court.

5. Now I am informed by the learned Counsel for the

applicant/accused that today, the applicant/accused Rajeev

Khandelwal appeared before the trial Court and has surrendered

himself.

6. The learned Counsel produces the order of the Metropolitan

Magistrate dated 10.10.2018 i.e., today, wherein it is mentioned

that the applicant/accused has surrendered before the Court and

he is taken in custody. The learned Counsel further submits that in

appr.497.2018_910.doc

view of this, the applicant/accused be released on bail. He

submits that the applicant has a good case on merits.

7. The learned Prosecutor submits to the orders of the Court.

8. In view of the submissions of the learned Counsel and as the

applicant/accused has surrendered before the trial Court and

considering the nature of the offence and period of sentence, the

application for bail is allowed on the following terms:

i) The impugned judgment and sentence dated

12.4.2017 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate,

33rd Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai in C.C. No.5953/SS/2015, is

suspended pending the hearing of the appeal;

ii) The applicant/accused is released on bail upon

furnishing cash bail bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/-;

iii) The applicant/accused shall not jump the bail.

iv) The applicant/accused shall remain available at the

time of hearing of the Revision.

9. The Criminal Application is disposed of on the above terms.

(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)