Mumbai, Maharashtra – April 25, 2024 – Bipin Krishna Dhamnaskar, a resident of Mumbai, has been granted bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai at Mazgaon, pending the outcome of his appeal against a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Background of the Case:

Dhamnaskar was convicted by the trial court in C.C. No. 7012762/SS/2019 on March 2, 2024, for an offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which deals with dishonored cheques. He was sentenced to simple imprisonment until the rising of the court and ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 5,00,000 within two months. In default of payment, he was to undergo an additional six months of simple imprisonment.

Dhamnaskar subsequently filed a criminal appeal (No. 224 of 2024) challenging the legality and propriety of his conviction. He also filed a bail application (No. 836 of 2024) seeking his release pending the appeal’s outcome.

Arguments Presented:

Ms. Dakshata Zagade, the learned advocate for Dhamnaskar, argued that her client had been on bail during the trial and that he had filed an appeal against his conviction. She highlighted that the substantive sentence of imprisonment and fine had been suspended.

The respondent, Arun Sheshgiri Shetty, the original complainant, was not represented in the proceedings.

Court’s Decision and Rationale:

Additional Sessions Judge K.P. Shrikhande, after hearing the appellant’s advocate, granted bail to Dhamnaskar. The court noted that Dhamnaskar had been on bail during the trial and that he had challenged his conviction through an appeal. The court also acknowledged that the substantive sentence of imprisonment and fine had been suspended.

The court stated that, considering these factors, Dhamnaskar could be released on bail pending the appeal’s outcome.

Bail Conditions Imposed:

The court granted bail to Bipin Krishna Dhamnaskar on the following conditions:

• Personal Bond and Surety: He must execute a personal bond of Rs. 30,000 with a surety of the same amount.
• Bail Execution: He must furnish the bail before the trial court within one month.
• Cash Security: He has the liberty to furnish cash security in lieu of a solvent surety.

Significance of the Decision:

This decision reflects the court’s consideration of the appellant’s right to appeal and the suspension of his sentence. By granting bail, the court allows Dhamnaskar to pursue his appeal without serving the sentence imposed by the trial court. The conditions imposed aim to ensure his presence during the appeal proceedings. This case is a common example of bail being granted during the pendency of a criminal appeal.