Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10265 (BOM)

RAJENDRA KANDASWAMI VANIYAR v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

APEAL/795/2026 · 2026-09-22

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 23-APEAL 795-26.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.795 OF 2026 Rajendra Kandaswami Vaniyar … Appellant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents ----- Mr. Vinod Kashid for the Appellant. Mr. V. N. Sagare, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Kishor Walanju, Appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2. PSI Sunil Khaire, Bangar Nagar Police Station is present. ----- CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 22.09.2026 P.C. : 1. This Appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short “SC & ST Act”) takes exception to the order dated 24.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Borivali Division, Dinodoshi, Mumbai below Exhibit-4 (Bail Application) in Special Case No. 366 of 2022. 2. By the order impugned, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the application for bail filed by the appellant, who is in custody in C.R. No.445 of 2022 registered at Bangur Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 324, 504, 506(2) read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(5) of the SC & ST Act. Dinesh 1 of 2 2 23-APEAL 795-26.doc 3. The bail is sought inter alia on the ground of long incarceration as an undertrial prisoner. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is in jail for a period of four years and three months. 4. Learned APP for the respondent/State has drawn my attention to the order passed by this Court dated 17.2.2026 in Bail Application No. 638 of 2026. It is submitted that the said order shows that when this Court was not inclined to grant any relief, the said bail application was withdrawn. Learned APP further submits that the trial has commenced and prosecution has already examined one witness. 5. Considering overall facts and circumstances, at this stage, I am not inclined to entertain the present appeal. Hence, the Appeal is dismissed. 6. However, liberty is granted to the appellant to file a fresh appeal before this Court if the trial is not concluded within a period of three months from today. (N.R. BORKAR, J.) Dinesh 2 of 2