Savita Harishankar W/O Harishankar Ambikaprasad Singh v. Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.403 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.231 OF 2017

1) SAVITA W/o.HARISHANKAR AMBICA ) PRASAD SINGH ) )

2) HARISHANKAR AMBICA PRASAD SINGH )...APPLICANTS V/s.

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

)...RESPONDENTS Mr.Aabad Ponda a/w. Mr.Ashish Raghuvanshi, Advocate for the Applicants.

Mrs.Purnima Kantharia, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Ms.V.S.Mhaispurkar, APP for the Respondent - State.

CORAM

:

A. M. BADAR, J.

DATE :

6th APRIL 2017 P.C. :

This is an application for suspension of sentence and releasing applicants / accused on bail during pendency of the appeal filed by them before this court.

avk 1/3

Heard both sides. Perused the impugned judgment and order of conviction. Applicants, who were original accused nos.2 and 3 are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years apart from payment of fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 201 read with 34 of the IPC. Heard both sides. The learned advocate for applicants / accused argued that the offence punishable under Section 201 read with 34 of the IPC is a bailable offence and as both applicants / accused have preferred appeal which was found fit for admission by this court, they may be enlarged on bail. The learned prosecutor opposed the application by contending that presence of applicants at the time of commission of offence is seen from the impugned judgment and order. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the impugned judgment and order. The offence alleged avk 2/3

against both applicants / accused is bailable in nature and short sentence of imprisonment is imposed on them. Hearing of the appeal will take its own time. Hence the following order : i) The order dated 15th March 2017 is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

(A. M. BADAR, J.) avk 3/3