Rameshwar Vilas Rathod vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 23694 Bom

Bombay High Court

Rameshwar Vilas Rathod vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 12 August, 2024

Author: Sarang V. Kotwal

Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal

                                    :1:                              11-apeal-384-24.odt

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.384 OF 2024

Rameshwar Vilas Rathod                                     .....Appellant
            Versus
State of Maharashtra
and another                                                .... Respondents
                                       -----
Ms. Shaheen Kapadia,             Advocate i/b.
                                       Vrushali Maindad for the
Appellant.
Ms. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Sandeep B. Satkar, Advocate h/f. Sunil S. Gosavi, Advocate
(appointed) for the Respondent No.2.
                               -----

                                     CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE : 12th AUGUST, 2024 P.C. :

1. This Appeal is taken on board as it was mentioned for

circulation and a praecipe is filed by the learned counsel for the

Appellant. It is mentioned in the praecipe that the Appeal was

preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 22.2.2024 passed

by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case

No.86/2019. The Appellant was convicted for the offence

punishable under Sections 354 and 506 of IPC and under Sections 8

and 12 of the POCSO Act. It is mentioned in the praecipe that the

Appellant was sentenced to suffer RI for three years and to pay fine

and in default to suffer further sentence. The last paragraph of the

praecipe mentions thus "Kindly note that the Appellant was 1 of 2

Deshmane(PS)

:2: 11-apeal-384-24.odt

sentenced imprisonment for 3 years and he has already undergone 2

years and 8 months. Hence we request this Hon'ble Court to kindly

list the above-captioned matter at the earliest."

2. It was not mentioned in the praecipe that the Appeal is

already admitted and that the Appellant was granted bail pending

his Appeal vide the order dated 6.5.2024 passed in I.A.

No.1544/2024 in Criminal Appeal No.384/2024. Learned counsel for

the Appellant admits that the Appellant is on bail.

3. All these facts are suppressed in the praecipe and the

circulation was obtained from the Court. There are many Appeals

pending where the accused are in jail. Inspite of this, this Appeal is

circulated on the admission board by not mentioning the order

granting bail to the Appellant. This suppression of fact is not

acceptable. Such practices are strongly deprecated. Therefore, I am

inclined to impose costs of Rs.2,000/-. Learned counsel for the

Appellant shall pay the costs of Rs.2,000/- with the Legal Services

Authority of this Court within a period of three weeks from today.

The Appeal shall proceed in due course in the category where the

Appellants are on bail.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE DESHMANE Date:

2024.08.16 17:32:09 +0530

2 of 2