Vinod Pandurang Chikne v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

Mhi 1 APPR-46-16.sxw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINALAPPLICATION NO. 46 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 54 OF 2016 Mr. Vinod Pandurang Chikne ...

Applicant vs.

(Orig. Accused) The State of Maharashtra ...

Respondent Mr. M.K.Kochrekar i/b. Mr. Sandip L. Babar Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Rajesh More, APP, for the State.

CORAM:

SMT. SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.

DATE : 1st February, 2016.

P.C.

This is an application seeking suspension of substantive sentence. The applicant herein was convicted by the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Esplanande, Mumbai for the offence punishable under Section 408 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer S.I. for six months and fine of Rs.2,500/- each in default S.I. for one month. The applicant was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to suffer

Mhi 2 APPR-46-16.sxw S.I. for six months and fine of Rs.2,500/- each in default S.I. for one month in C.C.No.741/PW/2007 vide judgment and order dated 17.9.2014.

2.

Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the applicant herein had filed Criminal Appeal No.939 of 2014 before the Sessions Court at Mumbai. The learned Sessions Judge vide judgment and order dated 21.1.2016 has been pleased to dismiss the appeal and had directed the accused-applicant to surrender to the bail bonds.

3.

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been taken into custody on 21.1.2016 and continues to remain in custody. It is further submitted that the applicant was on bail during the pendency of the trial as well as during the pendency of the appeal and has not committed breach of conditions imposed upon him and is, therefore, entitled to extension of the same relief during the pendency of the Revision Application which has been admitted by this Court. It is further submitted that both the Courts have not appreciated the evidence in its proper

Mhi 3 APPR-46-16.sxw perspective and hence the same needs to be reconsidered in the Revision Application.

4.

Taking into consideration the facts of the case and the submissions advanced across the Bar, the application deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following order :-

O R D E R

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) The substantive sentence imposed upon the applicant is hereby suspended. He be enlarged on bail. Same bail, fresh bonds. (iii) The applicant shall report to the Court of Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai, once in six months on the date specified by that Court. (iv) The parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order. Application stands disposed of.

(SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.)