Bombay High Court

SUSHIL LAXMAN THORATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

The court held that, given the short sentence and pending appeal, suspension of the sentence and grant of bail are appropriate.

Summary

The appellant, Sushil Laxman Thorat, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, in Sessions Case No.62 of 2023 for offences under Sections 353, 332 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, receiving a six‑month imprisonment, of which he had already served two months. He filed a criminal application seeking suspension of the sentence and bail pending his appeal (Criminal Appeal No.738 of 2026). The State opposed, arguing that a full trial had resulted in conviction. The High Court, noting the short term of imprisonment and the likelihood of a delay in hearing the appeal, granted the relief, suspending the sentence until the appeal is finally decided and releasing the appellant on a personal bond with sureties, subject to conditions. The order also required the appellant to appear before the trial court every six months and provided for cancellation of bail upon default.

Issues considered

Whether a sentence of six months imprisonment can be suspended pending the final disposal of a pending criminal appeal.
Whether bail can be granted to a convicted appellant under the circumstances.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 332, 353, 506

Subjects

bail
suspension of sentence
criminal appeal
IPC
conviction
short sentence
pending appeal

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:40492

906(A)-Cri-Apln-3684-2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

906 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3684 OF 2026
IN APEAL/738/2026

SUSHIL LAXMAN THORAT
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
.…
Mr. Harshad H. Padalkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. G. O. Wattamwar, APP for Respondent – State
.…

CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.

DATE : 04 September, 2026
PER COURT :-

1. This is an application for suspension of sentence and

grant of bail in consequence to the judgment and order of

conviction recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Beed,

in Sessions Case No.62 of 2023, dated 02.07.2026, convicting the

appellant for the offence under Sections 353, 332 and 506 of I.P.C.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that the

applicant was tried vide above sessions case and came to be

convicted by above judgment and order for the offence under

Sections 353, 332 and 506 of I.P.C. Sentence awarded is

1 of 3
(( 2 )) 906(A)-Cri-Apln-3684-2026

maximum six months imprisonment. That, he has already spent two

months behind the bars. Applicant has preferred appeal. As the

appeal is of 2026, as much more time is required to hear the appeal,

relief of suspension of sentence and grant of bail is urged for.

3. Learned APP opposed on the ground that on full fledged

trial, conviction has been recorded.

4. After considering the above submissions, taking into

account sentence of six months and that appeal being 2026, may not

be heard in near future, relief as prayed deserves to be granted.

Hence, the following order:-

ORDER

(i) Criminal Application stands allowed.

(ii) The substantive sentence imposed on the applicant Sushil
Laxman Thorat, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Beed, District Beed, in Sessions Case No.62 of 2023, dated
02.07.2026, stands suspended till final hearing and disposal
of Criminal Appeal No.738 of 2026.

(iii) The applicant be released on P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen thousand only) with two solvent sureties in
the like amount.

(iv) The applicant shall not commit any criminal activity.

2 of 3
(( 3 )) 906(A)-Cri-Apln-3684-2026

(v) The applicant 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 his
subsequent appearances.

(vi) In case of two consecutive defaults on the part of the
applicant 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 the bail granted to the
applicant.

(vii) Bail before the trial Court.

[ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. ]

SMS

3 of 3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…