Bombay High Court
Sagar Kanhu Khandale And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 January, 2024
Author: Revati Mohite Dere
Bench: Revati Mohite Dere
2024:BHC-AS:409-DB
8 ia 605 of 2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.605 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1116 OF 2022
1) Sagar Kanhu Khandale; and
2) Satish Dattatraya Bathe ... Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
.....
Mr.Dilip Kamath a/w. Ms.Asha Joshi and Ms.Aadnya Bhandari,
Advocate for the Applicants.
Mrs.P.P. Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent - State.
.....
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 5th JANUARY 2024
P.C. :
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2 By this Interim Application, the Applicants seek
suspension of their sentence and enlargement on bail pending the
hearing and final disposal of the aforesaid Appeal.
Rajeshri Aher 1/6
::: Uploaded on - 05/01/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/01/2024 07:53:24 :::
8 ia 605 of 2023.doc
3 The Applicants vide Judgment and order dated 13
March 2020, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Pune in Atrocity Special Case No.39 of 2014 have been convicted
alongwith other co - accused as under:
- for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w.
34 of the Indian Penal Code to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-
each, in default to undergo further rigorous
imprisonment for six months each;
- for the offence punishable under Section 364 r/w.
34 of the Indian Penal Code to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of
Rs.5,000/- each, in default, to undergo further
rigorous imprisonment for three months each;
- for the offence punishable under Section 201 r/w 34
of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous
Rajeshri Aher 2/6
::: Uploaded on - 05/01/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/01/2024 07:53:24 :::
8 ia 605 of 2023.doc
imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of
Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo further rigorous
imprisonment for three months each;
- All the substantive sentences were directed to run
concurrently.
- The applicants were, however, acquitted of the
offences punishable under Section 3(1)(x) a/w. 3(2)
(v) of 3(1)(x) r/w. 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
7(1)(d) of the Protection of Civil Rights Act,
37(1)135 of Bombay Police Act
4 Learned counsel for the Applicants seeks suspension
of Applicants' sentence and enlargement on bail, essentially on
the ground of, long incarceration of the Applicant i.e. 9 years and
10 months in custody without remission and 10 years and 11
months, with remission. Learned counsel relied on the Judgment
Rajeshri Aher 3/6
::: Uploaded on - 05/01/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/01/2024 07:53:24 :::
8 ia 605 of 2023.doc
of the Apex Court in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh passed in Criminal Appeal No.308 of 2022 [SLP (Cri.)
No.4633/2021], in support of their submission.
5 Learned APP does not dispute the fact, that the
Applicants are in custody for more than 9 years. She, however,
states that there are two witnesses in the case who have last seen
the Applicants with the deceased.
6 Perused the papers. Admittedly, the prosecution case
rests on the circumstantial evidence. We have vide order dated 22
June 2022, passed in Interim Application Nos.2167 of 2021 and
2200 of 2021 suspended the sentence of the co-accused i.e.
Applicants therein having regard their role i.e. on merits. As far
as the Applicants are concerned, it is not in dispute that the
Applicants without remission are in custody for 9 years and 10
months without remission, and, 10 years and 11 months with
remission, and, are presently kept in open prison. The Appeal is
Rajeshri Aher 4/6
::: Uploaded on - 05/01/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/01/2024 07:53:24 :::
8 ia 605 of 2023.doc
of the year 2022. We have Appeals in which accused are in
custody from the year 2014 and, as such, it is not possible for us
to take the aforesaid Appeal for final disposal out of turn. Even
otherwise, there are no extenuating circumstances to deny the
Applicants' bail, having regard to the facts of this case, as are
required to be considered. Thus, having regard to the decision of
the Apex Court decision in Saudan Singh Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh (Supra), there is no impediment in allowing the
application.
7 Considering the aforesaid, the Application is allowed
and the Applicants' sentences are suspended and they are
enlarged on bail pending the hearing and final disposal of their
Appeal on the following terms and conditions.
:: O R D E R :
:
(i) The Applicants be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond
in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each, with one solvent surety in
the like amount by each of them;
8 ia 605 of 2023.doc
(ii) The Applicants shall report to the trial Court, once in three
months on the day/date specified by the trial Court, till their
appeal is finally disposed of;
(iii) The Applicants shall keep the trial Court informed of their
current address and mobile contact number and/or change
of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time;
(iv) If there are two consecutive defaults in appearing before
the trial Court, the learned Judge shall make a report to the
High Court and the prosecution would be at liberty to file
an application seeking cancellation of bail.
7 The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms
and is accordingly disposed of.
8 All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of
this order.
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
