Bombay High Court
Rahul Dnyaneshwar Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra on 12 August, 2025
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal
Gokhale 1 of 5 5-apeal-806-25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 806 OF 2025
Rahul Dnyaneshwar Patil ..Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent
__________
Mr. Gaurav Parkar for Appellant.
Mr. Pankaj P. Devkar, APP for State/Respondent.
__________
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 12 AUGUST 2025
PC :
1. Heard Mr. Gaurav Parkar, learned counsel for the
Appellant and Mr. Pankaj Devkar, learned APP for the State.
2. The Appellant has challenged the Judgment and order
dated 25.06.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Panvel-Raigad, in Sessions Case No.65 of 2024. The
Appellant was convicted and sentenced as follows:
i) He was convicted for commission of the offence
punishable U/s.353 of the I.P.C. and was
Digitally
signed by
sentenced to suffer S.I. for six months and to pay
VINOD
VINOD BHASKAR
BHASKAR GOKHALE
a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default to suffer S.I. for
GOKHALE Date:
2025.08.13
11:16:05
+0530
one month.
ii) He was convicted for commission of the offence
::: Uploaded on - 13/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 13/08/2025 21:35:16 :::
2 of 5 5-apeal-806-25
punishable U/s.332 of the I.P.C. and was
sentenced to suffer S.I. for six months and to pay
a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default to suffer S.I. for
one month.
iii) He was convicted for commission of the offence
punishable U/s.504 of the I.P.C. and was
sentenced to suffer S.I. for three months and to
pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default to suffer S.I.
for fifteen days.
iv) He was convicted for commission of the offence
punishable U/s.506(I) of the I.P.C. and was
sentenced to suffer S.I. for three months and to
pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default to suffer S.I.
for fifteen days.
All the substantive sentences were directed to run
concurrently.
3. The incident which is the subject matter of this case was
dated 30.04.2023. PW-2 P.N. Dayanand Rathod was on traffic duty.
The Appellant started abusing him for no reasons. The Appellant
called his mother telephonically. His mother and 2 to 3 other ladies
came there. The Appellant started abusing PW-2 Dayanand in
filthy language. PW-2 Dayanand sought help of his other officers.
In the meantime, the Appellant went towards PW-2 Dayanand,
held his shirt and fell him down. He assaulted him in the stomach
and on his face. In the meantime, PW-2's colleagues came there.
::: Uploaded on - 13/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 13/08/2025 21:35:16 :::
3 of 5 5-apeal-806-25
The Appellant went away on his two wheeler. While going he
threatened PW-2 Dayanand. The F.I.R. was lodged, the
investigation was conducted and the Appellant was convicted and
sentenced, as mentioned earlier.
4. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that there is
discrepancy in the description of the incident by PW-2 Dayanand,
and PW-5 Mangesh who was helping PW-2 in his duties. The
incident is not true. The Appellant is falsely implicated. He
submitted that, maximum sentence imposed on the Appellant is for
six months. The Appeal is not likely to be decided within that
period. Therefore, the Appeal be admitted and the Appellant be
granted bail by suspending his sentence.
5. Learned APP submitted that the offence is serious and it
is proved through the evidence of PW-2 Dayanand himself and the
medical evidence.
6. All these questions raised by both the sides will have to
be decided at the final hearing stage. Therefore, I am inclined to
admit the Appeal. The sentence imposed is only for six months.
::: Uploaded on - 13/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 13/08/2025 21:35:16 :::
4 of 5 5-apeal-806-25
The Appeal is not likely to be decided within that period.
Therefore, I am also inclined to suspend the sentence and to grant
bail to the Appellant. However, considering that a public servant
performing his duty was assaulted as per the allegations, the
Appeal is required to be decided at the earliest.
7. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
i) Admit.
ii) Call record and proceedings with paper-books.
iii) The substantive sentences imposed on the
Appellant are suspended. The payment of fine is
not suspended.
iv) During pendency and final disposal of Criminal
Appeal No.806 of 2025, the Appellant is directed
to be released on bail on his furnishing P. R. bond
in the sum of Rs.25000/- with one or two sureties
in the like amount.
v) The Trial Court shall send the record and
proceedings with paper-books urgently.
5 of 5 5-apeal-806-25
vi) The Appeal be listed for final hearing on the
weekly final hearing board commencing from
06.10.2025.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
