[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Bajirao Kalyan More And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra on 19 December, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:36319
{1} CRI APPLN 4547 OF 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4547 OF 2025
IN REVN/378/2025
1] Bajirao Kalyan More
Age: 46 years, Occu.: Agriculture,
R/o. Shend (South),
Tq.Shirur-Anantpal, District Latur.
2] Vikas Bajirao More
Age : 25 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o. Shend (Sought),
Tq.Shirur-Anantpal, District Latur. ....Applicants
Versus
. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Officer in charge,
Police Station, Deoni,
District Latur. ....Respondent
.....
Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Sudarshan J. Salunke
APP for Respondent : Mr.N.D.Raje
.....
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
RESERVED ON : 18 DECEMBER, 2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 19 DECEMBER, 2025
ORDER :
-
1. Present application is for suspension of sentence and grant
of bail on account of judgment and order of conviction dated
07-02-2020 passed by learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Udgir in
Sessions Case No.63 of 2019 for offence under Sections 332,
{2} CRI APPLN 4547 OF 2025
353, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
and affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udgir,
District Latur by judgment and order dated 17-11-2025 passed
in Criminal Appeal No.7 of 2020.
2. Learned Counsel for the applicants would submit that
present applicants were tried by learned Assistant Sessions
Judge, Udgir vide Sessions Case No.63 of 2019 for offences
allegedly committed against complainant, a Junior Engineer and
his team members, and by judgment and order dated
07-02-2020 conviction came to be recorded. The same was
taken exception to by filing Criminal Appeal No.7 of 2020, but
the same has been dismissed by judgment and order dated
17-11-2025, affirming the judgment of the learned Assistant
Sessions Judge, Udgir.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants further pointed out that
in proceedings before both the learned Courts below i.e. Court
of Assistant Sessions Judge, Udgir as well as Additional Sessions
Judge, Udgir, District Latur, applicant was on bail. He pointed
out that even after dismissal of appeal, protection was granted
{3} CRI APPLN 4547 OF 2025
by learned Additional Sessions Judge, till revision is filed. He
pointed out that, even this Court has continued the protection
till today.
4. He further submitted that, there is false implication.
According to him, both offences under Sections 332 and 353 of
the IPC cannot go hand in hand or simultaneously. This law
point has not been appreciated by both the learned Courts
below and thus, according to him, there is arguable case in
revision before this Court. He points out that, applicants were
on bail during proceedings before both the learned Courts
below. That, applicant no.1 is a farmer and applicant no.2 is a
student of B.H.M.S. That, fine amount is also paid. Thus, during
pendency of revision, prayers for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail are urged for.
5. Above application is opposed by learned APP on the
ground that offence has been committed against public servants.
He took this Court through the observations of both the learned
trial Court as well First Appellate Court and would submit that
applicants do not deserve leniency and according to him,
{4} CRI APPLN 4547 OF 2025
granting relief would give wrong signal and embolden accused.
For above reasons, he prays to reject the prayers.
6. Here, it seems that prosecution was launched against
present applicants for commission of offence under Sections
332, 353, 323, 506 read with 34 of the IPC. Learned Assistant
Sessions Judge, Udgir, who conducted the trial, by judgment
and order dated 07-02-2020 recorded conviction for the offence
under Sections 332, 353 and 323 read with 34 of the IPC. The
same seems to have been challenged by way of Criminal Appeal
No.7 of 2020 before Additional Session Judge, Udgir, District
Latur, but the same was dismissed.
7. Now, prayers are pressed for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail. Sentence awarded by trial Court and affirmed by
First Appellate Court is maximum for two years rigorous
imprisonment each. Statement is made across the bar and it
also appears from operative part of the order that during
pendency of proceedings before both the Courts below,
applicants were on bail. It is further emerging that, till filing of
revision also learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udgir extended
{5} CRI APPLN 4547 OF 2025
the benefits of previous bail. There are no immediate prospects
of hearing the revision, which is said to be involving law point.
Resultantly, in the light of above and as fine amount is
deposited, application deserves to be allowed. Hence, following
order :
ORDER
(i) Criminal Application No.4547 of 2025 is allowed.
(ii) The substantive sentence imposed on the applicant
no.(1) Bajirao Kalyan More and applicant no.(2)
Vikas Bajirao More by the learned Assistant
Sessions Judge, Udgir in Sessions Case No.63 of
2019 on 07-02-2020 and confirmed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Udgir, District Latur on
17-11-2025 in Criminal Appeal No.7 of 2020,
stands suspended till final hearing and disposal of
Criminal Revision Application No.378 of 2025.
(iii) Applicant no.(1) Bajirao Kalyan More and applicant
no.(2) Vikas Bajirao More be released on P.R. Bond
of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen thousand only) each
with one solvent surety each in the like amount.
(iv) Bail before the trial Court.
( ABHAY S. WAGHWASE )
JUDGE
SPT
