GANESH ASHOK LONDHE v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH P P OFFICE
IA/2894/2026 · 2026-08-25
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3703 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3703 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
73-IA-2894-2026-(CR).doc Shubhada S Kadam IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2894 OF 2026 in CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 419 OF 2026 Ganesh Ashok Londhe ...Applicant/s Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent/s ________________________________________________________________ Mr. Pankaj D. Purway along with Mr. Shubham Yadav and Mr. Sidhanshu Singh, Advocate for Applicant. Ms. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for Respondent-State. Mr.Vinod Vasave, Deonar Police Station, present. _________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 25th AUGUST, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for respondent-State.
2.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was convicted by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 45th Court, Kurla Mumbai, for the offices punishable under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and sentenced to suffer two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.3,000/- and, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. Learned counsel further submitted that the said order is confirmed by learned Sessions Judge, Sessions Court, Mazgaon, Greater Mumbai. The applicant is behind bars since 3rd August 2026. The applicant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty. It may take time to dispose SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.08.25 14:19:16 +0530
73-IA-2894-2026-(CR).doc Shubhada S Kadam of the revision, hence, requested to allow the application.
3. It is contention of learned APP that the applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code 1860. If he is released on bail, he may abscond. Hence, requested to reject the application.
4. The sentence imposed on applicant is short term sentence. During the trial, the applicant was on bail and he has not misused the liberty. The applicant has deposited the fine amount. It may take time to dispose of the revision.
5. In view of above, the applicant’s sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of the revision on the following terms and conditions.
ORDER i. The applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount,. ii. The bail bond to be furnished before the Trial Court. Interim Application stands disposed of.
6. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)