Bombay High Court
Mulji Dhakal Shingade And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2021
Bench: S.S. Jadhav, N. R. Borkar
(5)IA-1671-19.doc
rkmore
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1671 OF 2019
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.138 OF 2020
Mulji D. Shingade & Anr. ] ... Applicants/Appellants
vs.
State of Maharashtra ] ... Respondents
Ms.Vrishali Raje, for Applicants.
Ms.P.P. Shinde, APP for State.
CORAM : SMT.SADHANA S. JADHAV &
N.R.BORKAR, JJ.
DATE : 3rd FEBRUARY, 2021.
P.C.
1] The applicants have preferred this application under
Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of
sentence and for bail.
2] The applicants have been convicted vide Judgment and
order dated 8th August, 2019 in Sessions Case No.36 of 2014 passed
by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palghar for the offences
(5)IA-1671-19.doc
punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced
to suffer imprisonment for life. Applicant No.2 is further convicted for
the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to suffer R.I. for six months.
3] We have heard learned counsel for the applicants and the
learned APP for the State.
4] Learned counsel for applicants submits that the case is
based on circumstantial evidence. She submits that the only
incriminating circumstance against the present applicants is recovery of
axe and mobile phone of the deceased at the instance of present
applicants. It is submitted that the said recovery is doubtful in view of
the admissions of Panch witness on recovery panchanama. She
further submits that there is no evidence in respect of the alleged
motive attributed to the present applicants. It is submitted that the
applicants were on bail during the trial and they did not misuse the
liberty granted to them. She, therefore, submits that the substantive
sentence imposed by the trial Court by impugned Judgment and order
be suspended and the applicants be released on bail.
5] On the other hand, learned APP for the State submits that
(5)IA-1671-19.doc
the applicants have been convicted for the serious offence punishable
under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that
considering the nature of offence, the applicants may not be released
on bail.
6] Admittedly, the case is based on circumstantial evidence.
The dead body was found on Highway. Applicants were on bail during
the trial and it appears that they have not misused the liberty granted
to them. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, we are
inclined to suspend the substantive sentence imposed by the trial court
and release the applicants on bail. Hence, following order is passed.
i] The application is allowed.
ii] The substantive sentence imposed upon the
applicants by the trial Court vide Judgment and Order dated 8th August,
2019, in Sessions Case No.36 of 2014, is hereby suspended.
iii] The applicants be released on bail on furnishing P.R.
Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.Twenty-five Thousand only) each
with one or more sureties in the like amount.
iv] The applicants shall report to the Sessions Court,
Palghar, once in 6 months on the date specified by the learned
Sessions Court, Palghar.
v] On failure to report on two consecutive dates, the
concerned court shall report the same to this Court and the prosecution
is at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
vi] Accordingly, application stands disposed of.
[N.R.BORKAR, J] [SMT.SADHANA S. JADHAV, J]
