Anil Shrimant Pawar v. The State Of Maharshtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI-INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2065 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 704 OF 2025 Anil Shrimant Pawar ...Applicant

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Priyal Sarda a/w Mr. Onkar Bajaj, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. A. S. Shalgaonkar APP for the State

CORAM

:

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

7th OCTOBER, 2025.

P.C.

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking suspension of IRESH MASHAL sentence imposed on him vide order dated 27th March 2025 by the Digitally signed by IRESH MASHAL Date:

2025.10.08 19:21:54 +0530 learned Sessions Judge, Solapur, in Sessions Case No. 281 of 2022 whereby, the applicant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default to suffer further simple imprisonment for one year. 2.

It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that applicant is behind bar for more than 2 years and 4 months out of 10 years of imprisonment. No test identification parade of the applicant was conducted as the offence was registered against the unknown

persons. But this fact is not considered by the Trial Court. It may take time to dispose of the appeal. Hence, requested to allow the application.

3.

It is the contention of learned APP that the applicant is a habitual offender. He has 6 antecedents. The prosecution has proved the case beyond the reasonable doubt. The issue of test identification parade is considered by the Trial Court and after considering that issue, the applicant has been convicted. Hence, requested to reject the application.

4.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused the impugned Judgment and Order. The F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons. In investigation, the applicant was arrested but the test identification parade was not conducted. This fact is not considered by the learned Trial Court. Moreover, applicant is behind bar for more than 2 years and 6 months. It may take time to dispose off the appeal. 5.

In view of above, I pass the following order:

O R D E R

I.

The application is allowed.

II.

The substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded to the applicant by the learned Sessions Judge, Solapur,

in Sessions Case No. 281 of 2022 is hereby suspended pending disposal of appeal.

III. The applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

IV.The bail bonds to be furnished before the learned Sessions Judge, Solapur.

6.

The application is disposed of in above terms. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)