Shri. Shaliwahan Mukund Solegaonkar v. Union Of India And ANR

1 of 3 16.IA.436.2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.436 OF 2021 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.361 OF 2020 Shaliwahan Mukund Solegaonkar Applicant versus Union of India and another Respondents Mr.Manoj Mohite, Senior Advocate, i/by Mr.Chaitanya Pendse, Adocate for applicant.

Mr.H.S.Venegavkar, Special Public Prosecutor, for Union of India. Mr.r.M.Pethe, APP, for State.

CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

DATE : 26th August 2021 PC :

1.

This is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. The applicant (accused no.1) is convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/-. He is also convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/-. The accused no.4 Rakesh Chandrakant Jadhav was convicted for the offence u/s.120-B r/w 409 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-.

MANISH SURESH THATTE MANISH SURESH THATTE Date: 2021.08.30 16:02:36 +0530 2.

The accused no.4 (appellant no.2) in the present appeal had preferred interim application No.1 of 2020 which has been allowed

2 of 3 16.IA.436.2021.doc by this Court vide order dated 28th August 2020 on the ground that sentence awarded is three years rigorous imprisonment. The maximum sentence awarded to the applicant in the present case is to suffer imprisonment for four years.

3.

Learned counsel for applicant submitted that the sentence is of short term. The appeal would not come up for final hearing immediately. The applicant has good case on merits. The application preferred by the co-accused seeking suspension of sentence has been allowed. It is submitted that the applicant undertakes to deposit fine amount in all the cases as a condition precedent for his release on bail on suspension of sentence. 4.

Mr.Venegavkar, learned Advocate for respondent no.1 CBI, submitted that in one case amongst all these cases in which applicant has been convicted and applicant has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment of ten years.

5.

The sentence imposed for conviction under Sections 409, 120B of IPC is three years and the sentence imposed for offence punishable under Sections 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act is four years. The accused no.4 Rakesh Jadhav has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for three years. The application preferred by him for suspension of sentence was allowed by this Court vide order dated 28th August 2020. 6.

Considering the aforesaid circumstances, I pass following order:

3 of 3 16.IA.436.2021.doc

ORDER

(i) The substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed vide judgment and order dated 18th February 2020 passed by Special Judge (CBI-ACB), Pune in Special Case No.80of 2018, is suspended during pendency of Criminal Appeal No.361 of 2020 and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on executing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; (ii) The deposit of fine amount in all the cases which is to the tune of Rs.24,00,000/- is condition precedent for the release of applicant on bail on suspension of sentence of imprisonment; (iii) The applicant is permitted to furnish cash security of Rs.25,000/- before Trial Court for a period of eight weeks after which the applicant shall furnish PR/SB as above; (iv) Interim Application stand disposed of.

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) MST