40.Cri.IA-244-2026.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 244 OF 2026 IN APEAL/66/2026 1. RAMZAN NABI MAKANDAR 2. ARBAJ IQBAL BEG VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...... Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Rakesh Shinde a/w Mr. Shubham Patil APP for Respondent-State : Mr. Anand S. Salgaonkar Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Adv. Poonam Dhotre ...... CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J. DATE : 22nd JUNE, 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned Counsels for the parties. 2. The Criminal Application is filed by the Applicants seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail, on account of their conviction recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Gadhinglaj, Kolhapur on 11.12.2025 in Special Case No. 19/2022. In the said case, Applicant No. 1/Ramzan Nabi Makandar is sentenced to undergo maximum imprisonment of one year under Section 354 of the IPC along with fine of Rs.1,000/- and also sentenced for other offences under various Sections. Applicant No. 2 is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 354 of the IPC. However, both the accused have been convicted under Sections 452, 294, 323, 504, 506 of the IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. Applicant No. 1 has been directed to deposit a total fine of 2026:BHC-KOL:4584 40.Cri.IA-244-2026.odt 2 Rs.10,500/-, whereas Applicant No. 2 has been directed to pay a fine of Rs.5,500/-. Applicant No. 2 is sentenced to undergo maximum imprisonment of 3 months under Sections 452, 294, 323, 504, and 506 of the IPC, with the substantive sentences directed to run accordingly. 3. The learned Counsel for the Applicants Mr. Shinde submits that Applicants are falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. The FIR is lodged with an intention to wreak vengeance against the Applicants. Applicant No. 1 has already deposited the fine amount of Rs.10,500/-, and Applicant No. 2 has deposited Rs. 5,500/-. The Applicants were previously arrested during the periods from 10.05.2022 to 01.06.2022 and from 03.06.2025 to 12.06.2025. The Applicants have no other criminal antecedents and are willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Taking into consideration the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and the variance therein, there is every likelihood that the appeal may result in acquittal of the accused Applicants. The Applicants have good case on merits in the present appeal. This Court has already admitted the appeal vide order dated 07.03.2026 by condoning the delay. As the appeal will take its own time for hearing, the substantive sentence imposed upon the Applicants may be suspended. 4. On the other hand, the learned APP as well as the appointed Counsel strongly oppose the application for suspension of sentence on the ground that the Applicants are involved in a serious offence. There are direct allegations of outraging the modesty of the victim against the Applicants. The Applicants reside in the same village as the Complainant, and there is apprehension that they may again threaten the Complainant and her family members if released on bail. The learned appointed Counsel further points to the incidents dated 03.05.2022 and 08.05.2022, 40.Cri.IA-244-2026.odt 3 submitting that the Applicants abused and threatened the father of the victim with dire consequences, and also threatened to commit rape upon the victim girl. It is alleged that Applicant No. 2 assaulted the father; however, the brother of the Complainant intervened and resolved the scuffle, after which the FIR was immediately lodged. The prosecution has led cogent evidence which, according to the learned Counsel, is sufficient to bring home the guilt of the present Applicants. Hence this is not a fit case to release the Applicants on bail by suspending the sentence as there is every likelihood that the appeal may be dismissed by this Court. 5. I have gone through the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Gadhinglaj, Kolhapur, along with the testimony of the victim and the other prosecution witnesses. The allegations in the FIR pertain to an incident dated 03.05.2022. Though the alleged incident of outraging the modesty of the victim, who is the daughter of the complainant, occurred on 03.05.2022, the FIR came to be lodged only on 10.05.2022. Thus, there is a delay of seven days in lodging the FIR. At this stage, the submission that the Applicants are falsely implicated in the present crime appears to be probable. However, these observations are prima facie in nature and are made only for the purpose of deciding the present application. The appeal was admitted on 07.03.2026, however, considering the pendency of appeals before this Court, it is likely to take considerable time for final hearing and disposal. Hence, I am inclined to exercise powers under Section 430 of the BNSS to suspend the sentence of the present Applicants. Hence, following order is passed. ORDER (I) Criminal Interim Application stands allowed. (II) The substantive sentence imposed on the Applicants in Sessions 40.Cri.IA-244-2026.odt 4 Case No. 19/2022 by the learned Sessions Judge, Gadhinglaj, Kolhapur, dated 11.12.2025, stands suspended till the final hearing and disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2026. (III) The Applicants shall be released on the same terms and conditions as were imposed by the learned trial Court and on the same bail bonds furnished before the learned trial Court during the pendency of the trial. (IV) The Applicants shall attend the Chandgad Police Station, District Kolhapur on 1st of February and 1st of August of every year and provide the detailed address and phone numbers of himself and two near relatives. (V) Failure on the part of the Applicants shall entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail. (VI) The High Court Legal Services Committee shall pay the fees of the appointed Counsel, which are quantified at Rs. 6,000/-. (VII) Application stands disposed of. [ MEHROZ K. PATHAN ] JUDGE NAJEEB..