Rohan Suresh Vaidya v. The State Of Maharashtra

2026:BHC-AUG:8702

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 829 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 143 OF 2026 Rohan Suresh Vaidya ..APPLICANT

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra and Another ..RESPONDENTS ....

Mr. Swapnil Joshi, Advocate a/w Ms. Priyanka Deshpande, Advocate i/b J.P. Legal Associates for applicant Mr. V.K. Kotecha, A.P.P. for respondent no.1 - State Mr. S.S. Panale, Special Public Prosecutor for respondent no.2 ....

CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.

DATE : 26th FEBRUARY, 2026 PER COURT :

.

Heard.

2.

Issue notice to the respondents. Learned A.P.P. waives service of notice for Respondent No.1 - State and Mr. Panale, learned counsel waives service of notice for Respondent No.2.

3.

This is an application for grant of bail and suspension of sentence. The applicant is the original Accused No.5, who was convicted by the Special Judge (CBI Court), Aurangabad vide judgment and order dated 09th February, 2026 passed in Special Case (ACB) No. 10 of 2007 for commission of offence

punishable under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.') and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.25,000/-. The applicant was also convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 420 of the I.P.C. and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.50,000/-. Default sentence was also imposed.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that all throughout the trial, the applicant was on bail and he did not misuse the liberty and had cooperated for earlier completion of trial. He submitted that considering the age of present applicant, he can be asked to undergo the sentence, if the appeal is rejected. He further submitted that the fine amount is already deposited. 5.

I have gone through the record of the case. In order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has examined sixteen witnesses and so far as the present applicant is concerned, at the relevant time the applicant was working on the post of Executive and it is with the aid of Section 120-B of the I.P.C. he is convicted.

6.

Be that as it may. Considering the length of sentence imposed upon the applicant and the fact that the applicant was on bail and after pronouncement of judgment he surrendered to the custody of the Court and

thereafter his application for grant of bail and suspension of sentence was allowed, I found no hurddle in allowing the present application. Hence, the following order :-

ORDER

(I) Criminal application is allowed.

(II) The sentence imposed upon the applicant vide judgment and order dated 09th February, 2026 by the Special Judge (CBI Court), Aurangabad in Special Case (ACB) No. 10 of 2007 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 120-B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code stands suspended till decision of appeal.

(III) The applicant be released on bail on same terms and conditions as were imposed by the trial Court. ( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. ) SSD