Ravindran Karathadi v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4464 OF 2025 IN REVN/35/2026

1. Ravindran Karathadi

2. M.I. Damodaran ... Applicants

Versus

State Of Maharashtra & Anr.

... Respondents _________________________________________________________________ by NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date: 2026.03.24 11:11:23 +0530 NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Ms.Gunjan Mangla a/w Ms.Tithi J and Ms.Shambhavi Singh, for the Applicants.

Ms.R.D. Humane, APP for Respondent-State.

Mr.Shilpan Gaonkar a/w Mr.Samarth Sadavarte, for Respondent No.2. _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 18th MARCH 2026 P.C. :

.

By this Application, the Applicants are seeking stay on the conviction imposed on the Applicants by learned Special Judge under the provisions of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ('SCST' for short). 2.

The learned counsel for the Applicants submitted that the Applicant's were charged for the offence punishable under Sections 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC'

for short) and Section 3(1)(x) of SCST Act. After completing the trial, the Applicants have been convicted under Section 504 of IPC and directed to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-. The Applicants have deposited the said amount. The learned counsel further submitted that the Applicant No.1 is the Chairperson of the trust and Applicant No.2 is Principal of the college. It may take time to dispose of the Revision Application. As per rule of Constitution of the Trust, if said conviction is in force, the Applicants have to resign from their post. The learned counsel further submitted that no evidence is produced on record to show that offence under Section 504 of IPC is committed by the Applicants and requested to allow the Application.

3.

It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that the learned Sessions Judge has passed well reasoned order and after considering evidence on record the Applicant's have been convicted. There are no grounds to stay the conviction and requested to reject the Application.

5.

I have heard all learned counsel. Perused impugned judgment and order.

6.

The Applicants have been acquitted from the charges

levelled against them except under Section 504 of IPC and directed to deposit Rs.10,000/- as fine amount. The Applicants have deposited the fine amount. If conviction is not stayed, the Applicants have to resign from their post. It may take time to dispose of the Revision Application, considering nature of punishment and its effect if conviction is not stayed. I pass following order.

ORDER

(i) The Application is allowed.

(ii) The conviction imposed on the Applicants by order dated 29th October 2025 passed by Special Judge under the SC and ST (PoA) Act, City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai in (Special Case No.5 of 2013) Crime No.162 of 2012 registered at Deonar, Mumbai Police Station is stayed till disposal of the Revision Application.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)