Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

DINESH MAHADEV KADAM AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal
Allowed

Holding

The court held that the sentence is to be suspended during the pendency of the appeal and the applicants are to be released on bail subject to strict conditions.

Summary

The applicants, Dinesh Mahadev Kadam and Minakshi Mahadev Kadam, were convicted by the Sessions Court of offences under Section 306 and Section 498‑A read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fines. While the conviction was under appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 2026), they sought suspension of the sentence and bail, contending that the prosecution’s evidence did not establish the elements of the offences and that they had complied with bail conditions during the trial. The State opposed the relief, asserting that the conviction followed a full trial. The High Court, after noting that the appeal had been admitted and that the applicants were on bail during the trial, granted the interim application, suspending the sentence and ordering bail on specified conditions, including furnishing a personal bond, depositing the fine, and regular appearance before the court. The order is subject to cancellation if conditions are breached.

Issues considered

  • Whether the sentence imposed in the Sessions conviction should be suspended pending the outcome of the criminal appeal.
  • Whether bail can be granted to convicted persons while the appeal is pending.
  • Whether the prosecution’s evidence sufficiently establishes the elements of offences under Section 306 and Section 498‑A read with Section 34 of the IPC.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • suspension of sentence
  • IPC 306
  • IPC 498-A
  • criminal appeal
  • interim relief
  • Maharashtra

Judgment

                                                           906-IA-321-2026 (CR).docx


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                 CRI-INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 321 OF 2026
                                    IN
                        CR. APPEAL NO. 126 OF 2026

     1. Dinesh Mahadev Kadam &
     2. Minakshi Mahadev Kadam                               …...Applicants
                        Versus.
        The State Of Maharashtra                             …...Respondent


                                       -----
Mr. Shreyash S. Butala for Applicants.
Mr. C.D. Mali, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.
                                      -------

                                   Coram :      ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

                                   Date     :   6th October 2026.

PER COURT :


1.      Heard Mr. Shreyash Butala, learned Advocate for the Applicants and

Mr. Mali, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.


2.      The Applicants are Accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 84 of 2016,

registered at Savarde Police Station, District Ratnagiri. The said crime was

registered as Sessions Case No. 30 of 2020. By the Judgment and Order of

conviction dated 2nd May 2026 in Sessions Case No. 30 of 2020 (“impugned


osk                                1 of 4
                                                         906-IA-321-2026 (CR).docx


judgment”), the Applicants are convicted of the offence punishable under

Section 306 of the IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years

and to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/-. Applicants have also been convicted of the

offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the IPC and

sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of

Rs.10,000/-.


3.    Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 2026, filed by the Applicants, was admitted

on 9th September 2026.


4.    Mr. Shreyash Butala, learned Advocate for the Applicants, submits that

during the pendency of Sessions Case No. 30 of 2020, the Applicants were on

bail. He submits that upon their conviction, the Applicants were taken into

custody on 2nd May 2026 and have remained so. He submits that the

Applicants regularly appeared before the Trial Court and did not violate the

bail conditions during the trial of Sessions Case No. 30 of 2020.


5.    Mr. Shreyash Butala, learned Advocate for the Applicants, submits that

the ingredients of the offence under Section 306 and 498-A of the IPC are not

established against the Applicants. He submits that the allegations against the

Applicants are vague and that the evidence led by the prosecution does not

support the ingredients of the said offences. He further submits that the star

witness, namely, the complainant, has not proved the allegation.



osk                               2 of 4
                                                         906-IA-321-2026 (CR).docx


6.    Mr. Mali, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State, submits that the

Applicants have been convicted after a full-fledged trial.


7.    Perused the grounds in the Memo of Appeal in the context of the

impugned judgment. Prima facie, the Applicants have a good prospect of

acquittal.


8.    Considering that the Applicants were on bail during the pendency of

Sessions Case No. 30 of 2020 and that the Appeal has been admitted, the

Applicants are entitled to suspension of the sentence and bail.


9.    This Application is, therefore, allowed on the following conditions.


       A.     The sentence imposed by the Trial Court in the impugned

              Judgment and Order of conviction dated 2nd May 2026 in

              Sessions Case No. 30 of 2020 shall stand suspended during the

              pendency of the Appeal, and the Applicants shall be released on

              bail on the following conditions:


       (i)    The Applicants shall be released on bail upon furnishing a PR

              Bond of Rs.25,000/- each, with one or two sureties in the like

              amount, to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge,

              Chiplun.


       (ii)   The fine imposed by the Judgment and Order of conviction dated



osk                                3 of 4
                                                                                   906-IA-321-2026 (CR).docx


                                    2nd May 2026 shall be deposited, if not already deposited, within

                                    a period of two (2) weeks from today before the Additional

                                    Sessions Judge, Chiplun.


                              (iii) The Applicants shall regularly appear before this Court as and

                                    when Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 2026 is listed on the Cause list.


                              (iv) The Applicants shall, within three (3) days of their release,

                                    provide their address along with proof and telephone numbers to

                                    the Investigating Officer, at Savarde Police Station, District

                                    Ratnagiri.


                              (v)   In the event of any default in complying with the conditions or

                                    misuse of the liberty granted to the Applicants, the prosecution

                                    shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.


                      10.     The Interim Application No. 321 of 2026 is allowed in the above terms.




                                                               [ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ]



           Digitally signed
           by OMKAR
OMKAR      SHIVAHAR
SHIVAHAR   KUMBHAKARN
KUMBHAKARN Date:
           2026.10.07
           10:40:57 +0530




                      osk                                 4 of 4


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.