Mumbai, June 28, 2022 – In a ruling that considered the accused’s prior bail during the trial, the length of the sentence, and the admission of the appeal, the Special Judge Shri A.S. Sayyad (CBI Special Court, C.R. No. 52) granted bail to Sanjay Nana Ghegadmal pending the hearing of his appeal against a conviction in a CBI case.

Background of the Case:

Sanjay Nana Ghegadmal, a 68-year-old resident of Ghatkopar (East), was convicted by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 3rd Court, Esplanade, Mumbai, in Criminal Case No. 58/PW/2013. He was sentenced to a maximum of three years of rigorous imprisonment, along with other sentences of two and one years for different offenses. Ghegadmal filed Criminal Appeal No. 373 of 2022 challenging his conviction.

Arguments Presented:

Advocate Santosh Mahamuni, representing Ghegadmal, argued that his client was granted bail by the trial court on the same day of his conviction and sentencing. He emphasized that Ghegadmal had never violated any bail conditions during the trial. He argued that his client should be given an opportunity to present his case on merit in the appeal. He assured the court that Ghegadmal was ready to abide by any conditions imposed.

Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Sandeep Singh, representing the CBI, ACB, Mumbai, submitted a reply and requested the court to pass a suitable order.

Court’s Reasoning and Decision:

Judge Sayyad, after reviewing the application and the reply, noted that Ghegadmal had preferred an appeal challenging his conviction. He also noted that the trial court had sentenced Ghegadmal to a maximum of three years of rigorous imprisonment and had granted him bail on the same day, suspending the sentence until the appeal period.

“There is no record which indicates that the applicant ever during trial has violated or jumped any condition of his bail order before the Ld. Trial Court,” Judge Sayyad stated in his order. “The Appeal is already admitted vide order passed by this court in Misc Application No.1191 of 2022. Considering the term of sentence and the other circumstances mentioned in the application, this court is of the considered opinion that no prejudice will be caused to prosecution if the present application is considered as sought by the applicant.”

Consequently, the court granted bail to Sanjay Nana Ghegadmal, ordering his release upon furnishing a Personal Recognizance (PR) bond of Rs. 15,000 with one surety of the same amount. A provisional cash bail of Rs. 15,000 was also granted, with four weeks allowed for furnishing the surety.

The court imposed a condition that Ghegadmal must remain present before the court on every date without fail.

Implications and Significance:

This ruling highlights the court’s consideration of several factors when granting bail pending appeal, including the accused’s conduct during the trial, the length of the sentence, and the status of the appeal. The decision underscores that when an appeal has been admitted and the accused has a history of complying with bail conditions, bail can be granted with appropriate safeguards.

The court’s decision also reflects a balanced approach, ensuring that the accused has an opportunity to pursue his appeal while also ensuring his presence during the proceedings.

The order was dictated, transcribed, and signed on June 28, 2022, and uploaded on the same day at 3:32 p.m.