Bombay High Court

SOPAN VITTHAL KANADE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED
Bench: SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Holding

The court suspended the sentences of all applicants pending the final hearing and disposal of the revision petition.

Summary

The applicants were convicted by a Judicial Magistrate First Class in 2022 for offences under IPC Sections 324, 341, 504 read with 149, and Sections 143, 148, as well as Section 144 for two of them. The conviction was affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge on appeal. Although they were on bail during trial and appeal, they were later arrested for non‑appearance and have been serving part of their sentences. The applicants filed a criminal revision petition seeking suspension of the sentence, citing their age and the fact that they were on bail. The High Court, noting the prima facie case for suspension, allowed the revision application, suspended the substantive sentences pending final disposal of the petition, and ordered the release of the applicants on a personal bond of Rs.15,000 each with a surety.

Issues considered

Whether the sentences imposed on the applicants should be suspended pending the final hearing of the criminal revision petition.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 143, 144, 148, 149, 324, 341, 504

Subjects

criminal revision
suspension of sentence
bail
IPC offences
personal bond
age factor

Judgment

                                                                 1931.2025CrAppln..odt
                                        1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1931 OF 2026
                                  IN
               CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.152 OF 2026

1.    Sopan Vitthal Kanade
2.    Jalindar Sopan Kanade
3.    Sudam Babasaheb Ghule
4.    Shashikala w/o. Sopan Kanade
5.    Bharti @ Swati w/o. Machindra Karpe                  … Applicants

      Versus

The State of Maharashtra                                   … Respondent
                                       ...…

Mr. Shashikant E. Shekade, Advocate for Applicants
Mr. B.V. Virdhe, APP for Respondent-State
                                    ......

                                CORAM         : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                                [VACATION COURT]
                                DATE          : 20th MAY, 2026
PER COURT :

1.     Heard.

2.     Issue notice to respondent – State. Learned APP waives service of notice

on behalf of the respondent – State.


3.     The learned Advocate for the Applicants submits that, the Applicants

were on bail during the trial as well as during the Appeal period.              The

applicants have not misused the liberty granted by the Trial Court as well as the

Appellate Court. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (Court No.2),

Georai (Trial Court) convicted the Applicants by the Judgment and Order dated
                                                                1931.2025CrAppln..odt
                                      2

24.03.2022 passed in Regular Criminal Case No.56/2013 for the offences

punishable under Sections 324, 341, 504 r/w. Sec. 149 and Sections 143, 148

of the Indian Penal Code (in short, ‘I.P.C.’) with fine and further convicted

Applicant Nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 144 of the IPC,

with fine. The conviction recorded by the learned Trial Court was upheld by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Beed (Appellate Court) in Criminal Appeal

No.30/2022 by the Judgment and order dated 07.05.2026.



4.     Considering the fact that, the Applicants were on bail during the Trial

as well as during the pendency of Appeal, however, due to their absence, they

were arrested on NBW and sent to concerned jail. Since then, they are behind

the bars. The Applicants have undergone considerable part of their sentence.

applicant Nos.1 and 4 are old aged persons. The applicants have made out

prima facie case for suspension of their sentence during the pendency of this

revision petition. Therefore, I am inclined to suspend the sentence awarded by

the learned Trial Court and further upheld by the Appellate Court. Hence, the

following order is passed.

                                   ORDER

(I)    Criminal Application stands allowed.


(II)   The substantive sentence imposed on the applicants 1. Sopan Vitthal
Kanade, 2. Jalindar Sopan Kanade, 3. Sudam Babasaheb Ghule,
4. Shashikala w/o. Sopan Kanade, 5. Bharti @ Swati w/o. Machindra Karpe
by the learned Trial Court by the Judgment and Order dated 24.03.2022
passed in Regular Criminal Case No.56/2013 for the offences punishable under
Sections 324, 341, 504 r/w. Sec. 149 and Sections 143, 148 of the Indian Penal
                                                                1931.2025CrAppln..odt
                                       3

Code (in short, ‘I.P.C.’) with fine and further sentence imposed on Applicant
Nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 144 of the IPC, with fine,
which has been upheld by the learned Appellate Court, stands suspended till
the final hearing and disposal of Criminal Revision Petition No.152 of 2026.


(III)   The applicants be released on P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand Only) each, with one solvent surety in the like amount each.


(IV)    Bail before the trial court.



                                            [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
                                                      JUDGE
GGP

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…