Bombay High Court
Ranbul @ Ranshya Chandrakant Patil vs State Of Maharashtra on 20 December, 2023
Bench: Prakash D. Naik, N. R. Borkar
2023:BHC-AS:39058-DB
21-IA-4586-2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4586 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 425 OF 2018
Ranbul @ Ranshya Chandrakant Patil ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
....
Mr. Kuldip Patil i/by Mr. Vivek Salunkhe, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, Addl. P.P. for the Respondent - State.
....
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, &
N. R. BORKAR, JJ.
DATE : 20th DECEMBER, 2023.
P.C.:
1. This is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail during pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 425 of 2018.
2. The applicant (original accused No.5) was prosecuted vide
Sessions Case No.24 of 2013 along with other accused. Vide
judgment and order dated 07.03.2018 passed by the learned
District Judge-2 & Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan, the applicant
has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of
the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to suffer life
imprisonment.
Sajakali Jamadar 1 of 3
::: Uploaded on - 22/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2023 22:59:40 :::
21-IA-4586-2023.doc
3. The applicant had earlier moved an application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail before this Court which
was rejected vide order dated 17.12.2018. However, thereafter
other accused, who were convicted along with the applicant, have
been granted bail by the Apex Court as well as this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-
accused Baliram Patil (accused No.15) had preferred Special Leave
Petition before the Apex Court which has been allowed vide order
dated 01.02.2022. The other co-accused Pradeep B. Patil (accused
No.2) had also approached the Apex Court by preferring Petition
for Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No.3268 of 2022, which has been
allowed vide order dated 18.08.2022. Thereafter, other co-accused
Anil K. Patil (accused No.4) has been granted bail by suspending
the sentence by this Court vide order dated 01.11.2023. Co-accused
Sanjay Karbhari (accused No.7) had also preferred an application
for bail before this Court which has been allowed vide order dated
08.11.2023. Co-accused Madhukar Patil has been granted bail by
the Court vide order dated 01.12.2023 passed in Interim
Application No.436 of 2022. It is submitted that the role attributed
to the present applicant is similar to that of the accused who were
granted bail by the Apex Court as well as this Court. The applicant
is in custody for a period of about 10 years.
Sajakali Jamadar 2 of 3
::: Uploaded on - 22/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2023 22:59:40 :::
21-IA-4586-2023.doc
5. The prosecution could not dispute the fact that the overt-act
attributed to the persons who have been granted bail by the Apex
Court as well as this Court is similar to that of the applicant.
6. We have perused the orders passed by the Apex Court as well
as this Court. One of the factor which was considered while
suspending the sentence in the aforesaid orders is that the convicts
were in custody for substantial period of time. Considering these
circumstances, the case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail
is made out.
ORDER
i) The Interim Application is allowed and disposed of.
ii) The substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed
against the present applicant in Sessions Case No. 24 of 2013
by the learned District Judge-2 & Additional Sessions Judge,
Kalyan vide judgment and order dated 07.03.2018 is
suspended.
iii) The applicant be released on bail on furnishing P.R.
Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in
the like amount.
iv) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station
once in a month, i.e., on first Saturday between 11.00 a.m.
to 2.00 p.m., till disposal of his Appeal.
(N. R. BORKAR, J.) (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
Sajakali Jamadar 3 of 3
