Shaila Devdasi Bhore v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3585 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1263 OF 2023 Shaila Devdasi Bhore ...Applicant

Versus

State of Maharashtra And Anr.

...Respondents

.....

Mr. Kuldeep Nikam a/w Mr. Onkar Bajaj Mr. Pratik Patil, Mr. Unmesh Jamdar, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. Shailesh Kharat, Advocate for Respondent No.2 appointed through legal-aid.

Mr. Anand Subhash Shalgaonkar, APP for the Respondent-State. .....

CORAM

:

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

12th DECEMBER 2025 P.C.

1.

By this Application, the applicant is seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

2.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that applicant is convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (POCSO Court) Sangli in Special (POCSO) Case No.82 of 2019 by order dated 28.02.2023 for the offence punishable under Section 324 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment (R.I.) for two years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer further R.I. of three Digitally signed by SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR Date:

2025.12.16 11:43:05 +0530 SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR

months. She is also convicted under Section 373 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment (R.I.) for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer further R.I. of three months. Additionally, she is also convicted under Section 370-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment (R.I.) for five years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer further R.I. of three months. All the substantive sentences of imprisonment are directed to run concurrently. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant has undergone six years and five months out of 10 years sentence of imprisonment. She has undergone half of the sentence. Hence, requested to allow the application.

3.

It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that if applicant is released on bail, she may abscond and requested to reject the application. 4.

I have heard all the learned counsels, perused the impugned Judgment and order. The applicant has undergone half of the sentence of imprisonment imposed on her. She is the Karta of her Family. It may take time to dispose off the appeal. Considering these facts, I pass following order :

ORDER

(i) The Application is allowed;

(ii) The substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded to the applicant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (POCSO Court) Sangli in Special (POCSO) Case No.82 of 2019 by order dated 28.02.2023 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 Additional Sessions Judge, (POCSO Court) Sangli. 5.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.

6.

As Mr. Shailesh Kharat is appointed to represent Respondent No.2 through legal-aid, professional fees of Rs.10,000/- be paid to him.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)