Bombay High Court
Surendra Keshavdev Ruia vs State Of Maharashtra on 21 December, 2023
Author: Prithviraj K. Chavan
Bench: Prithviraj K. Chavan
02-IA-4701-2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4701 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 415 OF 2023
Surendra Keshavdev Ruia ... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
.....
Mr. Satish L. Maneshinde a/w Ms. Anandini Fernandes, Namita
Maneshinde, Deepal Thakkar, for the Applicant.
Ms. G. P. Mulekar, APP, for the Respondent-State.
.....
CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.
DATED : 21st DECEMBER, 2023
P.C.
Issue notice to the respondent, returnable after four weeks.
2 Learned APP waives service on behalf of the respondent-State.
3 Heard learned Counsel Mr. Maneshinde for the applicant and
the learned APP.
4 This is an application for suspension of execution of sentence
rendered by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 10 th Court,
Rekha Patil 1 of 6
02-IA-4701-2023.doc
Andheri, Mumbai, by which the applicant was convicted for the
offences punishable under Sections 452, 324 r/w 34 of the Indian
Penal Code ("IPC" for short) and was sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for three years and one year respectively.
5 An Appeal preferred by the original two accused, namely-1-
Surendra Keshavdev Ruia, and 2-Sanjay Keshavdev Ruia was
dismissed by the lower Appellate Court by judgment and order
dated 19th December, 2023. Lower Appellate Court maintained the
conviction and sentences of the applicant. Operative part of the
order of the lower Court is quite strange which reads as under;
"i] The appeal No.271 of 2019 is hereby
dismissed.
ii] The appellant Surendra Keshavdev Ruia
shall be surrendered before the Ld. Trial Court
within one week from the date of Judgment and
order.
iii] If the appellant Surendra Keshavdev Ruia
failed to surrender within one week before the Ld.
Trial Court, then Ld. Trial Court shall be issued
conviction warrant against him.
iv] His bail bonds stands cancelled.
v] R & P be sent to the Trial Court".
Rekha Patil 2 of 6
02-IA-4701-2023.doc
The lower Appellate Court writes that the appellant Surendra
Keshavdev Ruia "shall be surrendered". Clause (iii) of the order
indicates "Trial Court shall be issued conviction warrant against
him". The language used by the lower Appellate Court is something
unusual and incorrect. Be that as it may. It is informed that the
accused - Sanjay Keshavdev Ruia passed away during pendency of
the Appeal.
6 At the outset, learned Counsel for the applicant has invited
my attention to the charge framed by the trial Court, which itself is
defective and had vitiated the entire trial, in the sense, the charge
was not explained to the original three accused including the
present applicant for the offence punishable under Section 324 of
IPC.
7 A bare look at the charge reveals that the charge under
Section 452 simpliciter r/w 34 of the IPC was framed and after
having recorded the plea of the applicant and the other accused,
subsequently, Section 324 r/w 34 of the IPC appears to have added
below the signature of the accused after recording their plea,
meaning thereby, the charge under Section 324 r/w 34 of the IPC
Rekha Patil 3 of 6
02-IA-4701-2023.doc
was neither framed nor explained to the applicant including the
other accused. Be that as it may.
8 Learned Counsel has also invited my attention to the
testimony of the first informant-PW-1-Gajanan Harivilas Ruia
indicating that no role is attributed to the applicant. Essentially,
there is a longstanding civil dispute pending between the first
informant vis-a-vis the accused. It is interesting to note that one of
the accused -Captain Swaran Nidhan Salaria has already been
acquitted.
9 It is brought to my notice that the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, while dismissing the appeal, directed the applicant to
surrender before the trial Court within one week from the date of
judgment and order. Learned Counsel for the applicant has filed an
application for extension of time to surrender before the trial Court
on the ground of ensuing winter vacation, however, lower
Appellate Court has rejected the said application, unmindful of the
fact that a Revision is preferred before this Court.
10 Ms. Mulekar, learned APP, on the other hand, submits that
Rekha Patil 4 of 6
02-IA-4701-2023.doc
there is some evidence against the applicant as the first informant,
in his evidence, has testified about the role attributed to the
applicant at the time of the alleged incident. The learned APP is fair
enough to admit that there is no overt act attributed to the
applicant by both the Courts below.
11 Having considered the aforesaid facts and evidence, the
execution of substantive sentence stands suspended pending the
hearing and final disposal of the Revision Application, upon the
applicant furnishing a P.R bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned
Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
12 At this stage, learned Counsel for the applicant prays for
furnishing cash bail till the sureties are arranged.
The applicant is permitted to furnish cash security in the sum
of Rs.25,000/- which will remain in force for a period of four
weeks. The applicant shall furnish surety after a period of four
weeks to the satisfaction of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate,
10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
Rekha Patil 5 of 6
02-IA-4701-2023.doc
13 List on 25th January, 2024.
14 All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
[PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]
Rekha Patil 6 of 6
