Bombay High Court
GAURAV ALIAS JYOTIBA CHANDRAKANT NIKAM AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The sentence is suspended pending the final hearing of the appeal and bail is granted to the applicants.
Summary
The three Nikam family members were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Latur, for an offence under Section 105 Part II read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and sentenced to five years' imprisonment. They filed a criminal application seeking suspension of the sentence and bail pending Criminal Appeal No.572 of 2026, alleging false implication, provocation by the deceased, and that the post‑mortem showed only a single head injury despite allegations of multiple stick assaults. The State opposed the relief, relying on eye‑witness testimony (PW‑4 and PW‑5) that implicated the applicants. The Court noted that the appeal would not be heard for a considerable time and, considering the factual disputes and the delay, granted the relief sought. Consequently, the sentence was suspended until the final disposal of the appeal, and the applicants were released on bail with conditions to appear before the trial court every six months.
Issues considered
- Whether the sentence imposed on the applicants should be suspended pending the final hearing of the criminal appeal.
- Whether bail should be granted to the applicants pending the final disposal of the appeal.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 105 Part II, 3(5), 352
Subjects
- suspension of sentence
- bail
- criminal appeal
- false implication
- provocation
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 105
- Section 3(5)
- criminal procedure
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41520
CrAppln-2879-2026
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2879 OF 2026
IN APPEAL/572/2026
1. Gaurav @ Jyotiba Chandrakant Nikam
Age: 22 years, Occu.: Agriculture.
2. Savita Chandrakant Nikam
Age: 38 years, Occu.: Aasha Sevika.
3. Chandrakant Namdev Nikam
Age: 55 years, Occu.: Agriculture.
All R/o. Mohadal, Post Ashta,
Tq.Chakur, District Latur. ….Applicants
Versus
. The State of Maharashtra
Police Station Chakur
District Latur. …..Respondent
…..
Mr. Yogesh G. Birajdar, Advocate for Applicants.
Mrs. Chaitali Chaudhari Kutti, APP for Respondent.
…..
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
Reserved on : 08 SEPTEMBER, 2026
Pronounced on : 09 SEPTEMBER, 2026
ORDER :
1. The instant application is preferred for suspension of sentence
awarded in Sessions Case No.45 of 2025 by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Latur vide judgment and order dated 09.07.2026, for
the offence punishable under Section 105 Part II read with Section
CrAppln-2879-2026
-2-
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [BNS] and equally, a
prayer is made for grant of bail to the applicants.
2. It is submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated.
That, even otherwise, the occurrence took place due to provocation by
the deceased. There are allegations regarding use of sticks and such
role has been attributed to several accused, whereas there is only one
injury. Even in Column No.17 of the postmortem report, no injuries
are noted. Therefore, on several counts, the applicants have a good
case on merits in the appeal. However, as the appeal would require
some more time for hearing, the relief of suspension of sentence and
grant of bail is urged for.
3. Learned APP opposed the application on the ground that there
is an eye-witness account. It is submitted that the role of the
applicants has been crystallized regarding the assault by use of sticks.
PW-4 and PW-5 are relevant witnesses and, for the said reasons, the
relief of suspension of sentence and grant of bail is opposed.
4. After considering the above submissions and on going through
the papers, it appears that the applicants were tried for the offences
punishable under Sections 103(1), 352 read with Section 3(5) of the
BNS in Sessions Case No.45 of 2025. Admittedly, conviction has been
CrAppln-2879-2026
-3-
recorded for the offence punishable under Section 105 Part II read
with Section 3(5) of the BNS. From the medical papers, it emerges
that there is only one head injury. There are allegations of assault
against as many as four accused by use of sticks. The learned Trial
Court has sentenced the applicants to undergo imprisonment for five
years, which is a fixed term. Taking into consideration the aforesaid
facts and as the appeal is of the year 2026, there are no chances of
hearing the same in immediate near future. Therefore, the relief as
prayed deserves to be granted. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
I. The Criminal Application is allowed.
II. The substantive sentence imposed on the applicants (1)
Gaurav @ Jyotiba Chandrakant Nikam, (2) Savita
Chandrakant Nikam and (3) Chandrakant Namdev Nikam
by the Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.45 of
2025 on 09-07-2026, stands suspended till the final hearing
and disposal of Criminal Appeal No.572 of 2026.
III. The applicants be released on P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two solvent
sureties each in the like amount.
IV. The applicants shall not commit any criminal activity.
CrAppln-2879-2026
-4-
V. The applicants shall remain present before the learned trial
Judge once in six months, till final hearing and disposal of
the appeal, commencing from the date he tenders bail
papers and thereafter, the trial Judge to fix dates for their
subsequent appearances.
VI. In case of two consecutive defaults on the part of the
applicants to remain present before the trial court, the trial
court to inform this court about the same and in that
eventuality, the prosecution would be at liberty to file an
application for cancellation of bail granted to the
applicants.
VII. Bail before the trial court.
[ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.]
scm
Checking your session…