Ranveer Narayan Sawant v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3492 OF 2022 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1015 OF 2022 Ranveer Narayan Sawant ..Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

..Respondents __________ Mr. Meghdeep Milind Oak a/w. Diptenda Bose a/w. Anirudh Gollapudi for Appellant.

Smt. M.R. Tidke, APP for State/Respondent No.1. __________ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE : 17th OCTOBER 2022 PC :

1.

This is an application for bail during pendency and final disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 1015 of 2022 preferred by the Applicant challenging the Judgment and order dated 06/09/2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Satara in Sessions Case No.15 of 2017. The Applicant and three others were tried for commission of offences punishable under sections 307, 323, 504 Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Date:

2022.10.18 10:41:23 +0530 and 506 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. All of them were acquitted from the VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Gokhale

Charges of commission of offences punishable U/s.307, 323, 504 and 506 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. Except the Applicant, others were acquitted of all the Charges. The Applicant was convicted for commission of offence punishable U/s.324 of I.P.C. and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer S.I. for 6 months. 2.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the incident had occurred on the spur of moment. There was no motive, intention or knowledge to commit this offence. Learned Judge has rightly acquitted the applicant from Charge U/s.307 of I.P.C. He submitted that, the applicant deserves to be acquitted on merits. He submitted that the sentence is only of one year. The applicant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the same. During trial he was in custody for three months. Therefore, out of one year he has substantially served major part of his sentence. Even after his conviction his sentence is suspended by learned trial Judge U/s.389 of the Cr.p.c. He, therefore, prays for bail during pendency of his Appeal.

3.

Learned APP opposed this application. She submitted that the medical evidence shows that, it was a serious injury. Even Doctor had described it as grievous injury and, therefore, bail should not be granted to the applicant.

4.

I have considered these submissions. Though there is force in the submission of learned APP, this can be considered only at the stage of final hearing. The applicant was on bail during trial. As submitted by learned counsel for the Applicant, he has undergone substantial portion of his sentence. He is granted bail after his conviction U/s.389 of Cr.p.c. Therefore, the applicant can be granted bail pending his appeal. There are no allegations that he has misused the liberty of his bail when he was on bail during trial.

5.

Hence, the order:

O R D E R

i) During pendency and final hearing of Criminal Appeal No.1015 of 2022, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P. R. bond

in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

ii) The Application is disposed of.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)