Bombay High Court
Lalit Janardhan Gavande vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 January, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
1 of 4 01-ia-4419-22
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4419 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1269 OF 2022
Lalit Janardhan Gavande ..Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent
__________
Mr. Swapnil Patil i/b. Mr. Santosh Bhamre for Applicant.
Smt. M. R. Tidke, APP for State/Respondent.
__________
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 17 JANUARY 2023
PC :
1. This is an application for bail pending final disposal of
appeal; which is admitted. The applicant was convicted by learned
Additional Sessions Judge-9, Nashik in Sessions Case No.23 of
2020 vide his Judgment and order dated 17/11/2022. The
Applicant was convicted for commission of offence punishable
U/s.332 of the I.P.C. and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year
and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to
suffer R.I. for two months.
Digitally
VINOD
signed by
VINOD
BHASKAR
2. The prosecution case is that on 25/02/2012 the first
BHASKAR GOKHALE
GOKHALE Date:
2023.01.18
11:46:31
+0530
Gokhale
2 of 4 01-ia-4419-22
informant Shantaram Mahale was driving an S.T. bus. He was
proceeding towards Nashik. He came to Toll Plaza of Madsangvi.
The applicant driving his car tried to overtake him in a dangerous
manner. There was some quarrel. The applicant pulled the first
informant Shantaram who was driving the bus out of the bus and
assaulted him. On this basis the F.I.R. was lodged and the
investigation was carried out.
3. The applicant faced the charges under sections 332 and
504 of the I.P.C. He was acquitted from the charges U/s.504 of the
I.P.C.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the
prosecution examined only four witnesses. The first informant had
died during trial. The prosecution witnesses were the S.T. conductor
Sandip, a passenger, the medical officer and the I.O. He submitted
that the passenger was a chance witness and his evidence is not
reliable. The conductor has not given details of the car of the
applicant to the police. As against this evidence, the applicant's
defence was not considered properly. The applicant was alone. The
3 of 4 01-ia-4419-22
bus driver and the passengers assaulted him and caused damage to
his car. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant was
on bail during trial and he has not misused that liberty. Even after
his conviction he was granted bail by the Trial Court U/s.389 of
the Cr.p.c. The applicant has paid the fine amount.
5. Learned APP conceded that the sentence is short.
6. I have considered these submissions. All these points
raised by learned counsel for the applicant will have to be ecided
at the final hearing stage. The sentence is short and the Appeal is
not likely to be decided during that period. The incident is more
than 10 year old. There are no allegations that the applicant has
committed any other offence in between. Considering these
aspects, the applicant can be granted bail during pendency of his
Appeal.
7. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
i) During pendency and final disposal of Criminal
4 of 4 01-ia-4419-22
Appeal No.1269 of 2022, the Applicant is directed
to be released on bail on his furnishing P. R. bond
in the sum of Rs.30000/- with one or two sureties
in the like amount.
ii) The Application is disposed of.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
