1 13-apeal-492-26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 492 OF 2026 Kunal Laxminarayan Chindale Versus State of Maharashtra through Police Station Yavatmal City, Dist. Yavatmal Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Ms. P.N.Lakhani, Advocate for the appellant. Shri A.M.Ghogre, APP for the respondent/State. CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J. DATED : 8th SEPTEMBER, 2026. The appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the judgment dated 12.08.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal in Sessions Case No. 102 of 2022, thereby appellant came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 353 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of three months and pay fine of Rs.500/-. He is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 332 of Indian Penal Code and sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment of three months and pay fine of Rs.500/-. He is further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 504 of SKNair 2026:BHC-NAG:12092 2 13-apeal-492-26.odt Indian penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of three months and pay fine of Rs.500/- and also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 506 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of three months and pay fine of Rs.500/-. 2. Heard. 3. Admit. 4. Call for record and proceedings. Criminal Application No. 704 of 2026 The present application has been filed by the appellant/applicant seeking suspension of the sentence and release of the appellant/applicant on bail during the pendency of the appeal. 2. Ms. Lakhani, learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submits that applicant is having a good case on merits. It is contended that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence on record in its proper perspective, which has resulted in erroneous findings against the appellant. The findings recorded by the learned Trial Court are contrary to the evidence led by the prosecution and are, therefore, perverse. It is further submitted that the material collected during the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses, as well as the defence of SKNair 3 13-apeal-492-26.odt the appellant/accused, has not been properly considered by the learned Trial Court. The appellant/accused was on bail during the trial. The appellant has also deposited the fine amount of Rs.500/-. There are no allegations that the appellant/accused has violated any condition imposed upon the applicant was on bail. There are no allegations that the applicant has ever tried to threaten the witness. Thus, the applicant is having a good reputation in the society and he is not a flight risk and hence, applicant may be released on bail by suspending the sentence. 3. As against this, Shri Goghare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposes the present application on the ground that the applicant is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 353 of Indian Penal Code for obstructing the public servant for performing his duty. There is every likelihood that the applicant may again indulge into identical offence or to assault the public servant. Thus, this is not a fit case to release the applicant on bail and hence application may be rejected. 4. I have gone through the judgment dated 12.08.2026 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal. I have also gone through the evidence of Umesh Meshram, who is informant, Sandip SKNair 4 13-apeal-492-26.odt Gaikwad and Investigating Officer. There are arguable grounds made by the appellant in the present appeal. The appeal is already admitted for final hearing. The appeal will take its own time for disposal. Since, the applicant was released on bail during the trial and there are no allegations that the applicant has threaten the complainant or other witnesses, I am thus inclined to exercise discretion under Section 430 of the BNSS to release the applicant on bail by suspending the sentence. Hence, I pass the following order. ORDER i. The criminal application is allowed; ii. The substantive sentence imposed upon the Applicant by the learned Convicting Court, viz., to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the offence under Section 353 of the IPC; to further suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 332 of the IPC; to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 504 of the IPC; and to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 506 of the IPC, is hereby suspended. subject to the condition SKNair 5 13-apeal-492-26.odt that the applicant on furnishing the P.R.Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount; iii. The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station once in every six months, commencing from 21.09.2026; iv. The applicant is directed not to tamper with the evidence and shall not threaten the complainant or the witnesses; v. The applicant shall furnish copies of his Aadhar Card and PAN Card to the Investigating Officer along with his residential address and the names, addresses and mobile numbers of two close relatives; vi. Needless to say, violation of any of the aforesaid conditions may entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of the bail granted herein above; vii. Application is disposed of accordingly. [MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.] SKNair Signed by: Mr. S.K. NAIR Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 11/09/2026 17:04:37