5 APEAL-735-26.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 735 OF 2026 Balaji Suryakant Ekurge ..Appellant Versus State of Maharashtra …Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3013 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 735 OF 2026 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 736 OF 2026 Salman Sherkhan Mulani ..Appellant Versus State of Maharashtra …Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3020 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 736 OF 2026 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 737 OF 2026 Dhanaji Shivaji Jadhav ..Appellant Versus State of Maharashtra …Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3021 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 737 OF 2026 Mr. Amey Sheth, for Appellants/Applicants in all applications. Mr. D J Haldankar, APP for Respondent – State in SAINATH, PA 1/4 SAINATH SANJAY BODKHE Digitally signed by SAINATH SANJAY BODKHE Date: 2026.09.05 15:15:47 +0530 5 APEAL-735-26.DOC APEAL/735/2026 a/w IA/3013/2026. Smt. R S Tendulkar, APP for Respondent – State in APEAL/736 & 737/2026 a/w IA/3020/2026 & IA/3021/2026. CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 03rd September 2026 P.C.: APPEAL/735/2026, 736/2026 & 737/2026 1. Heard. 2. Admit. 3. Call R & P. IA/3013/2026, IA/3020/2026 & IA/3021/2026 4. These applications are filed seeking suspension of sentence and to enlarge the applicants on bail during the pendency of the appeals. 5. By a judgment and order dated 04th August, 2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No. 100/2012, the applicants have been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 392 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of three years and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each, with default stipulation. SAINATH, PA 2/4 5 APEAL-735-26.DOC 6. Mr. Sheth, the learned Counsel for the applicants, submit that, the learned Sessions Judge has enlarged the applicants on bail. 7. Mr. Sheth, further submitted that, the applicants have a good case on merits. The applicants have not abused the liberty while they were on bail, during the pendency of the trial. Therefore, the applicants be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the appeals. 8. The learned APP opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence and release of the applicants on bail. 9. Evidently, the applicants have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of three years; which is a fixed term sentence. Ordinarily, where the convicts are sentenced to suffer a fixed term sentence, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, the Appellate Court ought to suspend the sentence and enlarge the applicants on bail. 10. In the case at hand, having regard to the large pendency of the cases before this Court, it is extremely unlikely that, the appeals can be heard in the near future. Therefore, this Court considers it expedient in the interest of justice to suspend the sentence and enlarge the applicants on bail. 11. Hence, the following order :- SAINATH, PA 3/4 5 APEAL-735-26.DOC : : O R D E R : : (i) The Interim Applications stand allowed. (ii) The substantive sentence imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No. 100/2012, arising out of CR No. 156/2011 registered with Paud Police Station, stands suspended till the final disposal of the appeal. (iii) The Applicants – Balaji Suryakant Ekurge, Salman Sherkhan Mulani and Dhanaji Shivaji Jadhav, be enlarged on bail on furnishing a PR Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and a surety in the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. (iv) The applicants shall not contact the victim and any other prosecution witness or give threat or inducement to any of the prosecution witnesses. (v) The Applicants shall mark their presence at Paud Police Station, on the first Monday of October and April every year, till the final disposal of the appeal. (vi) The Applicants shall attend the proceedings in these appeals, as and when directed. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] SAINATH, PA 4/4