Bombay High Court
Jignesh Govindbhai Nandvan vs The State Of Maharashtra on 4 August, 2022
Bench: R.P. Mohite-Dere, Sharmila U. Deshmukh
NISHA Digitally signed by
NISHA SANDEEP
SANDEEP CHITNIS
Date: 2022.08.05
CHITNIS 14:01:01 +0530
34-ia.2183.2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2183 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.683 OF 2022
Jignesh Govindbhai Nandvan ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Ms. Sakshi Mane a/w Mr. Shirish Sawant and Mr. Kiran Veram i/b
Rajeev Sawant and Associates, for the Applicant.
Mr. A. R. Kapadnis, A.P.P for the Respondent - State.
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : 4th AUGUST 2022
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of his
sentence and enlargement on bail, pending the hearing and final
disposal of the aforesaid appeal.
N. S. Chitnis 1/6
34-ia.2183.2022.doc
3. The applicant alongwith co-accused vide Judgment and
Order dated 30th May 2022, passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Borivali Division, Dindoshi, Mumbai, in Sessions Case No.84
of 2013, has been convicted and sentenced as under:-
- for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of
Rs.7,000/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1
year;
- for the offence punishable under Section 364 r/w 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and
to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for 1 year;
- for the offence punishable under Section 201 r/w 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and
to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for 6 months.
The aforesaid sentences were directed to run concurrently.
N. S. Chitnis 2/6
34-ia.2183.2022.doc
4 Perused the papers with the assistance of the learned
counsel for the parties. PW1 - Shivani Singh had approached the
Dahisar Police Station on 17th December 2012 at about 2:00 a.m. to
lodge a complaint as against her two brothers-in-law i.e. accused
Nos.1 and 4. Dahisar Police Station accordingly lodged an FIR as
against accused Nos.1 and 4, for the offences punishable under
Sections 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C). The
allegations made by PW1 - Shivani in the said FIR were that the said
accused physically assaulted her and hurled abuses at her. It appears
that again on the very same day i.e. on 17 th December 2012 at about
12:00 p.m, the First Informant i.e. PW1 - Shivani again visited the
police station to enquire about the progress of her FIR. At the police
station, PW1 - Shivani met PW2 - Bhavesh Shukla, brother of
deceased (Mahesh Shukla) who had come to lodge a missing report of
his brother. Pursuant thereto, PW1 - Shivani gave her supplementary
statement stating therein, that accused Nos.1 and 4 and accused Nos.2
and 5 had kidnapped Mahesh Shukla. Pursuant thereto, the police
added Section 364 r/w 34 of the I.P.C. to the FIR already registered
N. S. Chitnis 3/6
34-ia.2183.2022.doc
with the Dahisar Police Station. It appears that again on 20 th
December 2012 i.e. after 3 days of the lodging of the FIR, the dead
body of Mahesh was found in a nala at Virar. Pursuant thereto, the
police recorded the 2nd supplementary statement of PW1 - Shivani.
In the said supplementary statement, for the first time PW1 - Shivani
disclosed the name of the applicant as being present at the spot
alongwith the other accused. Based on the supplementary statement
and the finding of the dead body, the police added Sections 302 and
201 r/w 34 of the I.P.C. to the FIR. It is pertinent to note that there
are 2 other alleged eye-witnesses to the incident that took place on
17th December 2012 at about 12:00 to 12:15 a.m. i.e. PW3 - Deepak
Singh and PW4 - Ashish Dabhade. A perusal of the evidence of PW3
- Deepak shows that as far as the applicant is concerned, he is alleged
to have threatened the people not to inform the police or that they too
would have to face the same consequences. As far as PW4 - Ashish is
concerned, he has stated that it was accused - Bachhu Singh who
extended the said threats to the people. It is pertinent to note that the
statement of PW3 - Deepak was recorded on 25 th December 2012,
N. S. Chitnis 4/6
34-ia.2183.2022.doc
whereas, the statement of PW4 - Ashish was recorded on 1 st January
2013. Prima facie, there is not only delay in recording their
statement but there are discrepancies with regard to the exact role
played by the applicant. Apart from the same, the name of the
applicant has cropped up for the first time after 3 days of the incident
i.e. on 20th December 2012, as reflected in the evidence of PW1 -
Shivani. Apart from the said evidence, there is no corroborative
evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged offences. It is not
in dispute that the applicant was on bail pending trial and has not
misused or abused the liberty granted to him.
5. Considering the evidence on record and what is stated
hereinabove, the application is allowed and the applicant's sentence
is suspended and he is enlarged on bail, pending the hearing and final
disposal of his Appeal, on the following terms and conditions :-
ORDER
i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in
the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;
N. S. Chitnis 5/6
34-ia.2183.2022.doc
ii) The Applicant shall report to the trial Court, once in three
months on the day/date specified by the trial Court, till his Appeal is
finally disposed of;
iii) The Applicant shall keep the trial Court informed of his
current address and mobile contact number and/or change of
residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time;
iv) If there are two consecutive defaults in appearing before the
trial Court, the learned Judge shall make a report to the High Court
and the prosecution would be at liberty to file an application seeking
cancellation of bail.
6. The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
7. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this
order.
SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
N. S. Chitnis 6/6
