1 12 appa681.26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION APPA NO.681/2026 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.389/2025 Rajan Ranjit Dongre vs. The State of Mah., thr.P.S. Chandrapur City, District Chandrapur Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court' s or Judge' s Order Coram, appearances, Court' s Orders or directions and Registrar' s order Shri S.A.Jadhao, Counsel for the Appellant. Shri Amit Chutkey, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE & RAJ D.WAKODE, JJ. DATED : 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2026. 1. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicant/appellant seeks suspension of sentence as he is convicted by judgment and order dated 21.3.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Case No.16/2020 for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer RI for life. 3. The FIR came to be lodged by sister of deceased namely Komal with Chandrapur City Police Station on 26.10.2019 on allegations that her elder brother Akshay and younger brother Om had been to her house on 26.10.2019 when she was at her house. The accused along with other co-accused had been to her house and enquired about Akshay. They also disclosed that her brother Akshay has quarreled with brother of Sajan i.e. co- accused and he would not leave him and he would kill him. He abused her as well as her sister in a filthy language. One of co- accused by name Mamata Wankhede also abused her and 2026:BHC-NAG:12731-DB 2 12 appa681.26.odt threatened her that they would kill her brother Akshay. On the same day, at about 2:00 to 2:30 pm, they saw that the applicant/ appellant as well as other co-accused were assaulting her brother. Co-accused Sajan had knife in his hands and he was stabbing her brother. Whereas, the applicant/appellant and Jamir had caught hold her brother and were assaulting him with fists and kick blows. On the basis of the said report, the police registered the crime against the applicant/appellant and other co-accused. 4. Before the Trial Court, the prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses and considered the entire evidence and came to conclusion that the prosecution proved guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and convicted the applicant/appellant as well as other co-accused as the aforestated. 5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, the present appeal is preferred along with application for suspension of sentence. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant submits that with the similar role, other co-accused Jamir is already released on bail by this court by suspending the sentence. The similar role is attributed to the applicant/appellant. He submits that the evidence of eyewitnesses discloses that only role attributed to the applicant/appellant is to the extent of assault by kick and fists blows. Thus, he submitted that considering the evidence on record, even accepting as it is, the role of the applicant/appellant would came to lesser Sections and, therefore, the 3 12 appa681.26.odt applicant/appellant has every chances of success in the present appeal. In view of that, the execution of the sentence be suspended and the applicant/appellant be released on bail. 7. Learned APP for the respondent/State has strongly opposed the said contentions and submitted that considering the act was committed in furtherance of the common intention, the application deserves to be rejected. 8. After hearing both sides and perusing the entire evidence, especially the evidence of PW1 Komal and PW5, who are eyewitnesses of the incident, it shows that the role to the extent of assault by fists and kick blows is attributed to the applicant/appellant. The cause of death of the deceased is due to cut throat injury due to sharp weapon. Thus, even accepting that the role of the applicant/appellant was there in assaulting, but, admittedly, death is not caused due to the act of the applicant/appellant. With the similar role, the other co-accused is already released on bail. 9. Admittedly, the appeal would take its own time for its final disposal. 10. In the meantime, considering reasons mentioned by learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, there is a substance in the submissions that the role of the applicant/appellant can bring his case to lesser Sections and, therefore, it requires consideration. 11. This aspect is considered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Omprakash Sahni vs. Jai Shankar Chaudhari and anr, 4 12 appa681.26.odt reported in (2023) 6 SCC 123, wherein after considering catena of decision, it is held that, “bearing in mind the aforesaid principles of law, the endeavour on the part of the Court, therefore, should be to see as to whether the case presented by the prosecution and accepted by the Trial Court can be said to be a case in which, ultimately the convict stands for fair chances of acquittal. If the answer to the above said question is to be in the affirmative, as a necessary corollary, we shall have to say that, if ultimately the convict appears to be entitled to have an acquittal at the hands of this Court, he should not be kept behind the bars for a pretty long time till the conclusion of the appeal, which usually take very long for decision and disposal. However, while undertaking the exercise to ascertain whether the convict has fair chances of acquittal, what is to be looked into is something palpable. To put it in other words, something which is very apparent or gross on the face of the record, on the basis of which, the Court can arrive at a prima facie satisfaction that the conviction may not be sustainable. The Appellate Court should not reappreciate the evidence at the stage of Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and try to pick up few lacunas or loopholes here or there in the case of the prosecution. Such would not be a correct approach”. 12. At this stage, admittedly, appreciation of the evidence is not permissible. What is required to be looked into is, whether there are any other reasons pointing out that there are chances of acquittal of the applicant/appellant on the evidence recorded by the trial court. Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant 5 12 appa681.26.odt succeeded in showing that the applicant/appellant is having chances of acquittal. 13. In view of that, the application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, we proceed to pass following order: ORDER (1) The Criminal Application is allowed. (2) The execution and implementation of the judgment and order of sentence dated 21.3.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Case No.16/2020 shall stand suspended, till disposal of the present appeal. (3) The applicant/appellant shall be released on bail on his executing a P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount. (4) The applicant/appellant shall attend the Trial Court on first day of every month, till disposal of the appeal. (5) The applicant/appellant shall furnish names of his two relatives along with their residential address proofs before the trial court. (6) The applicant/appellant shall not leave jurisdiction of Chandrapur district without prior permission of this court. With this, the Criminal Application stands disposed of. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.389/2025 1. Heard. 6 12 appa681.26.odt 2. Paper book is already prepared. 3. List the appeal for final disposal in the week commencing from 26.10.2026. [JUDGE] [JUDGE] !! BrWankhede !! Signed by: Mr. B. R. Wankhede Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 24/09/2026 19:42:09