This order is corrected as per speaking to the minutes of the order dated 25.09.2025. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. 915 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2771 OF 2025 IN APEAL/373/2023 Nana Alias Rahul Uddhav Gaikwad ..Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ….. Shri. Sanjaykumar B. Bhosale, Advocate for the Applicant Shri. S. K. Shirse, APP for the Respondent – State. ….. CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. Dated : SEPTEMBER 23, 2025 PER COURT :- . This is the successive Application for Suspension of Sentence. The earlier Criminal Application No.1558 of 2023 was considered by this Court and rejected by Order dated 27.06.2023, with the following observations: “3. Considered the submissions advanced. Perused the relevant evidence and the judgment under appeal. True, the name of the applicant does not figure in the F.I.R. The fact is, however, that, the applicant was a convict of offence of murder and undergoing life sentence. The present crime has been committed by him while he was on furlough/ parole. Although his name does not figure in the F.I.R., the victim did give his description and has even identified him in the test identification parade. This Court is, therefore, not inclined to grant the application for the present, even though the applicant is behind the bars for little over 4 years. If the appeal is not decided within a period of next two years, the applicant is at liberty to revive his prayer for suspension of sentence. The application is rejected.” This order is corrected as per speaking to the minutes of the order dated 25.09.2025. 2 2. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that, the Appeal was not heard within a period of two (2) years and now also there is no possibility that the Appeal would be finally heard, as the Co-convicts / Co-Appellants are granted Bail and they will drag the matter. He submits that, the Applicant had put in more than six (6) years of imprisonment and the minimum sentence of ten (10) years is awarded. He submits that, the Application be allowed. 3. The Application is opposed by the learned APP. He submits that, in the Order dated 27.06.2023 the Court has considered the offence and previous Conviction of the Applicant and rejected the Application. He submits that, now the Paper-book is ready and therefore, the Appeal can be heard finally and the Application be rejected. 4. The Applicant - Appellant is convicted along with three (3) others by the learned Sessions Court, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (the then Aurangabad) for the offence punishable under Section 394 r/w. Sec. 34 of the India Penal Code (for short, ‘I.P.C.’) and sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for ten (10) years and fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand), in default, to suffer Simple Imprisonment for six (6) months; and for the offence punishable under Section 506 r/w. Sec. 34 of the I.P.C., sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for two (2) years and fine of Rs.500/- (Rs. Five Hundred), in default, to This order is corrected as per speaking to the minutes of the order dated 25.09.2025. 3 suffer Simple Imprisonment for two (2) Months. The sentence of the three (3) Co-convicts is suspended and they are released on bail. The order, by which the earlier Application for Suspension of Sentence was rejected, show that, one of the aspect was that, the Applicant was convicted for the offence of Murder and undergoing Life Sentence and while on Furlough / Parole, he committed the present Crime. The learned Advocate for the Applicant tenders across the bar copy of the Judgment dated 17.07.2025 passed by this Court at the Principal Seat in Criminal Appeal No.46 of 2015 acquitting the Applicant - Appellant from the Charge of Murder, for which he was convicted by the learned Trial Court in Sessions Case No.556/2013 arising out of C.R. No.123/2012 registered with MIDC Bhosari Police Station. The Sentence awarded is a term sentence of ten (10) years. The Applicant has undergone imprisonment of six (6) years and six (6) months. This Application is preferred as this Court had granted liberty to revive the prayer for Suspension of Sentence, if the Appeal is not decided within a period of two (2) years, which is over. In this view of the matter, the Application is considered and the following order is passed. ORDER (i) The Application is allowed. (ii) The substantive Sentence imposed by the learned Additional This order is corrected as per speaking to the minutes of the order dated 25.09.2025. 4 Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Sessions Case No.537 of 2019 vide Judgment and Order dated 17.10.2020 on the Applicant, by name, Nana Alias Rahul Uddhav Gaikwad, for the offences punishable under Sections 394 and 506 r/w. Sec. 34 of the I.P.C., is suspended during pendency of the Appeal. (iii) The Applicant be released on bail on furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount. (iv) The Applicant shall mark his presence at Pangri Police Station, Tal. Barshi, Dist. Solapur, within whose jurisdiction he is having his residence, on first Thursday of every month, until further Orders. (v) Bail before the Trial Court. 5. Application stands disposed off accordingly. ( NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. ) GGP Signed by: Gajanan G. Punde Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 25/09/2025 14:23:27