Bombay High Court
MUKUND KRISHNA POLversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The court suspended the sentences of Mukund Pol, Krishna Pol and Dattatray Pol pending the final hearing of their appeals, while rejecting the bail application of Avadhut Pol.
Summary
The applicants, Avadhut, Mukund, Krishna and Dattatray Pol, were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Satara, for offences under Sections 307, 504, 506 and 34 of the IPC, with sentences of rigorous imprisonment. They filed two interim applications seeking suspension of their sentences pending the final hearing of their respective criminal appeals, contending false implication, anticipatory bail during trial, and lack of corroborative evidence. The State opposed, arguing the seriousness of the attempt‑to‑murder charge and the presence of eye‑witness and medical evidence. Justice Mehroz K. Pathan examined the trial record, found a plausible case for the appeals of Mukund, Krishna and Dattatray, and consequently suspended their sentences subject to bond and periodic police reporting, while rejecting Avadhut's application. The order partially allowed IA‑399 and IA‑401, granting release on bond for the three applicants and directing compliance with reporting conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the sentences imposed on the appellants should be suspended pending the final hearing of their criminal appeals
- Whether the appellants are entitled to bail/temporary release in view of the nature of the offences and the evidence on record
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 307, 323, 34, 504, 506
Subjects
- interim application
- sentence suspension
- anticipatory bail
- attempt to murder
- IPC
- criminal appeal
- bond
- police reporting
Judgment
1
16-IA-399-2026 (CR) AW IA-401-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRI-INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 399 OF 2026
IN
CR. APPEAL NO. 162 OF 2026
Mukund Krishna Pol …........Applicant
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra And Anr. ….......Respondents
WITH
CRI-INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 401 OF 2026
IN
Digitally
signed by
SHANTANU
CR. APPEAL NO. 164 OF 2026
SHANTANU SHANKARSA
SHANKARSA DHUDUM
DHUDUM Date:
2026.07.28
14:51:07
+0530 1. Avadhut Krishna Pol
2. Krishna Mahadu Pol
3. Dattatray Krishna Pol …........Applicants
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra And Anr. ….......Respondents
-----
Mr. Maner Taher Isaalli a/w Adv. Maner Sahil Taher, for Applicants in both
applications.
Mr. Nitin B. Patil, APP, for the Respondent-State in IA/399/2026.
Ms. Madhavi H. Mhatre, APP, for the Respondent-State in IA/401/2026.
-----
CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.
DATE : 27th JULY, 2026.
P.C.
1. Heard learned counsel for the Applicants and learned APP for
the Respondent-State.
2. By these Applications, the Applicants have approached this Court
for seeking suspension of sentence imposed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Satara, vide Judgment and Order dated 12/06/2026 in
Shantanu S. Dhudum
2
16-IA-399-2026 (CR) AW IA-401-2026.DOC
Sessions Case No. 28 of 2019. The accused Nos.1 to 4 are convicted for the
offence punishable under Sections 307, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”), however the accused Nos.1
to 3 are sentenced to suffer R.I. for 5 years each. The accused Nos.1 to 4
are further convicted under Sections 504 & 506 read with 34 of I.P.C. and
sentenced suffer R.I. for 1 year and 2 years respectively. All the sentences
of R.I. shall run concurrently.
3. Learned counsel for the Applicants submits that the Applicants
are falsely implicated in the present crime. It is further submitted taking
into consideration the nature of the allegations, all the Applicants were
granted anticipatory bail and were on bail during the pendency of trial.
The Applicants were only taken into custody after the judgment of the
learned Sessions Judge, Satara dated 12/06/2026. The Applicants are
having a good case on merits.
4. Learned counsel further submits that the Applicant - Mukund
Krishna Pol, the Appellant in Criminal Appeal No.162 of 2026 has been
convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 504 and 506 IPC.
Even, though the role of the Applicants - Krishna Mahadu Pol, Dattatray
Krishna Pol and Mukund Krishna Pol are identical in nature of giving
exhortation, Krishna Pol and Dattaray Pol are convicted under Section 307
of the IPC. A perusal of the first information report and the testimony of
the injured witness Sandip Jadhav and his wife Nilam Jadhav would itself
suggest that the complainant himself had jumped before the tractor when
Shantanu S. Dhudum
3
16-IA-399-2026 (CR) AW IA-401-2026.DOC
the cultivation operations were going on. The Applicants had no intention
to commit murder of the first informant Sandip Jadhav. A perusal of the
testimony of the other witnesses also does not corroborate the allegations
in the F.I.R. The Applicants are already acquitted for the offence punishable
under Section 323 of the IPC. The Applicants are convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 307, 504, 506 of the IPC, even without there
being any corroborative evidence to the allegations made by the first
informant, PW-1 Sandip Jadav. The Appellants are having good case on
merits. Taking into consideration that the punishment imposed upon
accused Mukund Pol, Appellant in Criminal Appeal No.162 of 2026 i.e.
below 3 years, the learned Sessions Judge had itself suspended the
sentence vide order dated 12/06/2026. The Applicants are further ready to
abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the
Applicants may be protected.
5. Learned counsel further submits that the Applicants Krishna Pol ,
Dattatray Pol, Appellants in Criminal Appeal No.164 of 2026 are also
identically situated that of Mukund Pol and are having good case on merits
and there is every likelihood that these Appellants may succeed in the
Appeal(s). The Appeal(s) are admitted for final hearing and would take its
own time for its disposal. The Appellants were on anticipatory bail during
the entire trial and there are no allegations against them that they have
violated any of the conditions imposed by the trial Court. They are further
Shantanu S. Dhudum
4
16-IA-399-2026 (CR) AW IA-401-2026.DOC
ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
Hence, both the applications may be allowed.
6. As against this, the learned APP strongly opposed these bail
applications on the ground that the Applicants are involved in the serious
offence of attempt to commit murder. There are eye witnesses i.e. the first
informant Sandip Jadhav, the wife of first informant Nilam Jadhav and
Mangesh Jadhav, who were seen the Applicants accused running over the
victim injured PW-1 Sandip Jadhav by a tractor when the PW-1 Sandip
Jadhav had opposed the cultivation of the disputed land. There is medical
evidence which corroborates the allegations that the victim injured witness
had sustained the grievous injuries in the said incident and as such, the
offence under Section 307 of the IPC, attempt to murder, is clearly made
out. Hence, there is every likelihood that the appeal(s) may be dismissed
and the Appellants would be required to undergo the remaining sentence.
Hence, these applications may be rejected.
7. I have gone through the judgment and order passed by the
learned trial Court dated 12/06/2026 as well as the deposition of PW-1
Sandip Jadhav, PW-5 Nilam Jadhav, PW-4 Mangesh Jadhav and PW-7
Priyanjali Kadam (Doctor). After going through the evidence of the
witnesses, it prima facie appears that arguable case is made out in the
appeals. There is every likelihood that either the conviction of the
Appellants can be altered or the Appellants may succeed in the appeals or
the same may result into acquittal, as the first information report and
Shantanu S. Dhudum
5
16-IA-399-2026 (CR) AW IA-401-2026.DOC
deposition of PW-1 itself would suggest that the victim had came in front of
the tractor after seeing the main Accused Avadhut was cultivating the
disputed land. The offence under Section 307 of I.P.C. can be said to be
made out only against Avadhut Pol, whereas the other two accused Krishna
Pol and Dattatray Pol are identically placed with accused Mukund Pol, who
is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 504 and 506 of the
IPC. In so far as the Avadhut Pol is concerned, taking into consideration the
evidence led by the prosecution, I am not inclined to entertain the bail
application of Applicant No.1 Avadhut Pol, however liberty is granted to
again approach this Court after a period of six months, if the appeal is not
heard finally. In so far as Applicant - Mukund Pol in Criminal Interim
Application No. 399 of 2026 and Applicant Nos.2- Krishna Pol & Applicant
No.3- Dattatray Pol in Criminal Interim Application No.401 of 2026, are
concerned, I am inclined to pass the following order:
ORDER
i. In so far as the Applicant No.1 – Avadhut Pol in Criminal
Interim Application No.401 of 2026 is concerned, the
application is rejected.
ii. The Criminal Interim Application No.401 of 2026 is partly
allowed.
iii. The substantive sentence imposed upon the Applicant No.2-
Krishna Pol and Applicant No.3-Dattatray Pol in Criminal
Shantanu S. Dhudum
6
16-IA-399-2026 (CR) AW IA-401-2026.DOC
Interim Application No.401 of 2026, is hereby suspended
until final hearing of the Criminal Appeal No.164 of 2026.
iv. The Criminal Interim Application No.399 of 2026 is allowed.
v. The substantive sentence imposed upon the Applicant –
Mukund Pol in Criminal Interim Application No.399 of 2026 is
hereby suspended until final hearing of the Criminal Appeal
No.162 of 2026.
vi. The Applicant No.2-Krishna Pol and Applicant No.3-Dattatray
Pol in Criminal Interim Application No.401 of 2026 and
Applicant – Mukund Pol in Criminal Interim Application
No.399 of 2026, be released on furnishing P.R. Bond in the
sum of Rs.50,000/- each, with one or two sureties in the like
amount.
vii. The Applicant No.2-Krishna Pol and Applicant No.3-Dattatray
Pol in Criminal Interim Application No.401 of 2026 and
Applicant – Mukund Pol in Criminal Interim Application
No.399 of 2026, shall attend the concerned Police station
once in six month starting from 10th August, 2026.
viii. Both the Applications stands disposed off accordingly.
( MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.)
Shantanu S. Dhudum
Checking your session…