Bombay High Court
Sandip Rambhau Binnar vs State Of Maharashtra on 1 February, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
1/4 07-IA-383-23-IN-APEAL-96-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.383 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.96 OF 2023
Sandip Rambhau Binnar .... Applicant
versus
State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
.......
• Ms. Rashmi More i/b. Ergo Juris, Advocate for Applicant.
• Smt. M. R. Tidke, APP for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 01st FEBRUARY, 2023
P.C. :
1. This is an application for bail pending final disposal of
the Appeal preferred by the Applicant. The Applicant was
convicted and sentenced by the Additional Sessions Judge,
Nashik, vide his Judgment and Order dated 09/01/2023 passed
in Sessions Case No.143/2020.
Digitally
signed by
MANUSHREE
MANUSHREE V NESARIKAR
V NESARIKAR Date:
2. The Applicant was convicted for commission of offence
2023.02.03
16:54:35
+0530
punishable u/s 332 r/w 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The major
Nesarikar
2/4 07-IA-383-23-IN-APEAL-96-23.odt
sentence imposed on him was for two years for offence
punishable u/s 379 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous
imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable u/s 332 of
the Indian Penal Code. He was also imposed fine for both these
offence separately. He was acquitted for the offence punishable
u/s 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation)
Act, 1957.
3. Heard Ms. Rashmi More, learned counsel for the
Applicant and Smt. M. R. Tidke, learned APP for the State.
4. The prosecution case is that on 16/06/2016 at 07.45
p.m. the truck driven by the Applicant was intercepted by the
informant Talathi and his team. The Applicant was directed to
take the truck to Talathi's office. The Applicant pushed the
Talathi, kicked him and drove his truck towards Sinnar. On this
basis, the FIR is lodged. The investigation was carried out and
the Applicant faced the trial.
3/4 07-IA-383-23-IN-APEAL-96-23.odt
5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the
incident is not true. The false FIR is lodged against the
Applicant. He submitted that the Applicant is acquitted from the
charges of offence punishable u/s 21(1) of Mines and Minerals
(Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. Even offence u/s 379
of the Indian Penal Code is not made out because it is not the
prosecution case that he was driving a stolen truck. Section 379
of the IPC was applied on a specious ground that the truck was
in possession of the Talathi and then it was taken away forcibly
by the Applicant. In such case section 379 of IPC could not be
attracted. She further submitted that the Applicant was on bail
during trial and he has not misused the same.
6. Learned APP opposed this application. She submitted
that the conduct of the Applicant shows that he does not have
any regard for law and therefore bail should not be granted to
him.
7. I have considered these submissions. The issues raised
by both the sides will have to be considered at the final hearing
4/4 07-IA-383-23-IN-APEAL-96-23.odt
stage. The incident is old. It had taken place on 16/06/2016.
The Applicant was on bail during trial. There are no allegations
of misuse of that liberty. There are no antecedents shown against
him for the period from 2016 till today. The sentence is short.
The Appeal is not likely to be decided within that short period.
Therefore the Applicant deserves to be released on bail.
8. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) During pendency and final disposal of the
Criminal Appeal No.96 of 2023, the Applicant is
directed to be released on bail on his furnishing
P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty
Thousand only), with one or two sureties in the
like amount.
(ii) Interim Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
