Bombay High Court
Sushil Bhagwan Jadhav vs The State Of Maharashtra on 22 October, 2025
2025:BHC-AS:46180
SKN 2-IA-3725.25 & 3744.25-REVN-433-25.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3725 OF 2025
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3744 OF 2025
IN
REVISION APPLICATION NO. 433 OF 2025
Sushil Bhagwan Jadhav and others. ... Applicants.
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra. ... Respondents
______________________
Mr.Ganesh S. Patil with Prasad Vanthale, Vishan Adsule, Akash Ahire and
Amol Raut for the Applicants.
Mr.Vitthal Konde-Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the Respondent- State.
______________________
SANJAY CORAM : RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.
KASHINATH (VACATION COURT)
NANOSKAR
Digitally signed by
SANJAY KASHINATH DATE : 22nd October 2025
NANOSKAR
Date: 2025.10.23
11:53:22 +0530
P.C.:-
1. Heard Mr.Patil for the Applicants and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. This Revision Application is filed against the Judgment and order dated
25th September 2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel,
District- Raigad in Criminal Appeal No.323/2019 and the order dated 6 th July
2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Karjat, District- Raigad in
Regular Criminal Case No.100/2014. By the impugned order dated 25 th
September 2025, the learned Additional Sessions Judge partly allowed the appeal,
however, maintained the conviction under section 354 read with 34 of the Indian
Penal Code (IPC) wherein the Applicants were sentenced to suffer six months
1/3
::: Uploaded on - 23/10/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 23/10/2025 21:15:33 :::
SKN 2-IA-3725.25 & 3744.25-REVN-433-25.doc
rigorous imprisonment to each. The Applicants were also convicted under section
452 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for eight
months each with fine of Rs.3,000/- in total and in default of sentence to suffer
simple imprisonment for fifteen days.
2. The learned Advocate for the Applicant states that Applicants have been
arrested on 25th September 2025 and are in custody. He further submitted that
there are discrepancies and contradictions in respect of evidence of the prosecution
witnesses which have not been properly considered by both the Courts below.
3. The Advocate for the Applicants raised arguable points. The Applicants
were on bail during the pendency of the trial as well as during the pendency of
appeal before the learned Sessions Judge. It is unlikely that the Revision
Application can be heard on merits and decided in the near future. Hence during
the pendency of the Revision Application, the Applicants deserve to be released
on bail. Hence the following order:
ORDER
(i) The sentence imposed on the Applicants by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel, District- Raigad by its Judgment
and Order dated 25th September 2025 in Criminal Appeal
No.323/2019 is hereby suspended.
(ii) The Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their
furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each and sureties of
the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(iii) Both, Interim Application No.3725/2025 and Interim
SKN 2-IA-3725.25 & 3744.25-REVN-433-25.doc
Application No.3744/2025 are allowed.
(iv) Needless to say that the Applicants shall pay the fine amount as
directed by the impugned order dated 25th September 2025.
(v) During the pendency of the present Revision Application, the
Applicants are directed to attend the Karjat Police Station, District-
Raigad, on every first Monday of every third month between 10.00
a.m. to 12.00 noon. Thus, the Applicants shall attend Karjat Police
Station four times in a year.
(RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.)
