Bombay High Court
GOVINDU MAHADU KARHALE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJNISH R VYAS
Holding
The application for bail and suspension of sentence is allowed, with the sentence suspended pending the final decision of the appeal.
Summary
The applicants were convicted under IPC sections 353, 323 and 341 read with Section 34 and sentenced to six months’ simple imprisonment with fines, while being acquitted of other charges. They remained on bail throughout the trial, did not misuse liberty, and surrendered after judgment, subsequently applying for bail and suspension of the sentence pending appeal. The State argued that the conviction was based on proper evidence and the application should be rejected. The Court noted the short term of the sentence, the payment of fines, the applicants' good conduct on bail, and the pending appeal, and therefore allowed the application. The sentence was suspended until the final decision of the appeal and the applicants were released on bail on the same terms as earlier.
Issues considered
- Whether bail and suspension of a sentence may be granted pending the final decision of an appeal for offences under IPC sections 353, 323 and 341 read with Section 34.
- Whether the applicants' conduct on bail and payment of fines justify suspension of the sentence.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 323, 34, 341, 353, 504, 506
- Motor Vehicle Act — s. 177
Subjects
- bail
- suspension of sentence
- IPC
- common intention
- appeal
- criminal procedure
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:3577
(1) 912criapln4171.25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
912 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4171 OF 2025
IN APPEAL/843/2025
GOVINDU MAHADU KARHALE AND ANOTHER
….Applicants
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
…..Respondent
Mr. A. S. More, Advocate h/f Mr. M. K. Jadhav, Advocate for the
applicants
Ms. U. S. Bhosale, APP for the respondents/State
CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.
DATE : 28th JANUARY, 2026
PER COURT :
1. This is an application for grant of bail and suspension of
sentence. The applicants who are accused have been convicted for
the commission of offences punishable under sections 353, 323, 341
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘the IPC’).
For commission of offence punishable under Section 353 of the IPC
the applicants were directed to suffer simple imprisonment for six
months and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to suffer simple
imprisonment for 10 days. For commission of offence punishable
under Section 323, similar sentence was imposed. So far as
commission of offence under Section 341 is concerned, the applicants
1 of 4
(2) 912criapln4171.25
were directed to pay fine of Rs.500/-. Sentences were ordered to run
concurrently. The applicants have been acquitted for commission of
offences punishable under sections 504, 506 read with section 34 of
the IPC and sections 146 punishable under Section 177 of the Motor
Vehicle Act.
2. Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that all
through out the trial, they were on bail and they did not misuse the
liberty. He further submitted that they cooperated for early
completion of trial. According to him, after pronouncement of
judgment by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, they surrendered
to the custody of the court and thereafter applied for suspension of
sentence, which was granted by the trial court. He further stated that
he has arguable points in the appeal.
3. Per contra, learned APP has contended that conviction
rendered is based on proper appreciation of evidence and in order to
bring home the charge, the prosecution has examined six witnesses
including PW-1 who was informant. Learned APP further submitted
that cogent and reliable material is available on record and therefore,
the application may not be entertained.
4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
argument advanced, so also I have gone through the record of the
case. Maximum sentence is of six months and the applicants have
2 of 4
(3) 912criapln4171.25
deposited the fine amount. It is not disputed that the applicants were
on bail during the trial and they did not misuse the liberty. Thus,
considering the fact that decision on the appeal will take time and
sentence imposed upon them is of fixed term, I am inclined to allow
the application. There is one more reason to arrive at conclusion that
the applicants are already acquitted for commission of offences
punishable under sections 504, 506 read with section 34 of the IPC
and sections 146 punishable under Section 177 of the Motor Vehicle
Act and therefore, the evidence will have to be tested in the light of
grounds raised in the memo of appeal. As the arguable points are
involved, the application is allowed. Hence the following order is
passed:
ORDER
a] The criminal application is allowed.
b] Sentence imposed upon the applicants for
commission of offences punishable under sections 353,
323, 341 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code
in Sessions Case No. 37/2021 dated 17-12-2025, passed
by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hingoli is hereby
suspended till final decision of the appeal.
3 of 4
(4) 912criapln4171.25
c] The applicants be released on bail on same terms
and conditions as were imposed by the trial court.
d] The application is disposed off accordingly.
[RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. ]
VishalK/912criapln4171.25
4 of 4
Checking your session…