Bombay High Court
Nisha Nitin Thakur And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2022
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
:1: 2-i-ia-2690-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2690 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.809 OF 2022
Nisha Nitin Thakur and others ..... Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
-----
Mr. Gaurav Parkar, Advocate , for the Applicants.
Smt. M.R. Tidke, APP for the Respondent-State.
-----
CORAM :SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 17th AUGUST, 2022
P.C. :
1. This is an application for bail pending hearing
PRADIPKUMAR
PRAKASHRAO
DESHMANE
Digitally signed by
and final disposal of Criminal Appeal No.809/2022.
PRADIPKUMAR
PRAKASHRAO
DESHMANE
Date: 2022.08.18
2. The applicants are convicted and sentenced by
10:36:28 +0530
the Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad at Alibag vide his
judgment and order dated 2.7.2022 passed in Sessions Case
No.27/2021. The applicants were convicted for commission
of offence punishable under Section 353 read with 34 of IPC
1 of 4
Deshmane(PS)
:2: 2-i-ia-2690-22.odt
and were sentenced to suffer RI for six months and to pay
fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to
suffer further SI for one month. All the applicants were
convicted for commission of offence punishable under
Section 332 read with 34 of IPC and were sentenced to
suffer RI for six months and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- each
and in default of payment of fine to suffer further SI for one
month. The applicants were acquitted from the charges of
commission of offence punishable under Section 504 read
with 34 of IPC. The substantive sentences were directed to
run concurrently. They were given benefit of set-off under
Section 428 of Cr.P.C.
3. Heard Shri Gaurav Parkar, learned counsel for
the applicants and Smt. M.R. Tidke, learned APP for the
State.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants states that the
fine amount is already paid by the applicants. He submitted
that there are no independent witnesses examined by the
prosecution. The stick is not recovered. There is serious
2 of 4
:3: 2-i-ia-2690-22.odt
doubt about the injuries caused to the first informant.
5. Learned APP opposed this application. However,
she conceded that the sentence is short.
6. I have considered these submissions and I have
also perused the deposition of the first informant Lalit
Thakur, who was examined as PW-1. He was working as a
Technician in MSEDCL, Pen, Raigad. The incident occurred
on 19.5.2021 in two parts. In the morning, all the accused
abused the first informant who was trying to repair the
damaged electricity line. The main incident occurred at 3.30
p.m. to 4.00 p.m., at that time the applicant Shobha was not
present, but, there are allegations that when the first
informant climbed a pole to repair the electricity line, the
applicant Nisha hit him with a stick on his left leg.
7. As rightly submitted by learned counsel for the
applicants, the sentence is short and the appeal is not likely
to be taken up for final hearing during that period. The
contentions raised by the applicants will have to be
considered at the stage of final hearing.
3 of 4
:4: 2-i-ia-2690-22.odt
8. In these circumstances, the applicants can be
granted bail during pendency of the appeal. They have
already paid the fine. Hence, the following order :
:: O R D E R ::
i. During hearing and final disposal of Criminal
Appeal No.809/2022, the applicants are directed to
be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. bonds in
the sum of Rs.30,000/- each (Rupees Thirty
Thousand Only) with one or two sureties each in
the like amount.
ii. Interim Application is disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
Deshmane (PS)
4 of 4
