Tejas Vasantrao Fulware And ANR v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 477 of 2026 in CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 156 OF 2026

1. Tejas Vasantrao Fulware

2. Sachin @ Pappu Vasantrao Fulware ...Applicants.

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra

...Respondent

_________________________________________________________________ Mr. Niranjan Pachupate i/b. Mr. Chandansingh Shekhawat, Advocate for Applicants.

Ms. Sangeeta D. Shinde, APP for Respondent-State. _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 11th FEBRUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicants are seeking suspension of sentence and bail during the pendency of appeal filed by the applicant. 2.

The applicants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 323, 504 and 506 read Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (for short "the IPC"). For offence punishable under Section 324 r/w Section 34, the applicants are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months. For Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date:

2026.02.11 18:38:08 +0530 SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM offence punishable under Section 323 r/w. Section 34 of the IPC, the

applicants are sentenced to under simple imprisonment of six months and fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months. For offence punishable under Section 504 read with Section 34 of the IPC, the applicants are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of six months and fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months and For offence punishable under Section 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC, the applicants are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of six months and fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months. 3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicants that the Trial Court has granted bail and suspended their sentence during the appeal period. During the trial, the applicants were on bail and they have not misused the liberty. Hence, requested to allow the application. 4.

The learned APP for respondent-State strongly objected to allow the application.

5.

I have heard both learned counsel.

6.

The maximum sentence imposed on the applicants is of three years. The Trial Court has granted bail to the applicants and suspended their sentence during the appeal period. During the trial, the applicants were on bail and they have not misused the liberty. It may take time to

dispose of the appeal. Considering these facts, the applicants' sentence is suspended and they are enlarged on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of the appeal, on the following terms and conditions.

ORDER

(i) The applicants be enlarged on bail on furnishing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The bail bond to be furnished before the Trial Court. Interim Application stands disposed of.

7.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)