Munna Singh Rampal Singh @ Patel v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 556 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 532 OF 2014 Munna Singh Rampal Singh @ Patel .. Applicant / Appeal v/s.

The State of Maharashtra .

..Respondents Mr.Anand Khairnar a/w. Adv. Nitin Sejpal for the Applicant. Ms.S.D.Shinde, APP for the Respondent/State.

CORAM : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ.

DATED : 19th APRIL, 2017.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant has sought suspension of sentence imposed on him vide judgment and order dated 5th May, 2014 in Sessions Case No.124 of 2012 and to enlarge him on temporary bail for a period of 15 days, pending the final disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 532 of 2014.

2.

The applicant herein has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and is undergoing sentence of

imprisonment for life.

3.

The learned Counsel for the Applicant has submitted that the marriage of the brother of the Applicant is scheduled on 30th April, 2017 at his native place at Dhari Kasouta, Uttar Pradesh. The learned Counsel for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant would like to remain present for his brother's marriage ceremony, which is an important family function. The learned Counsel for the Applicant has placed on record a xerox copy of the invitation card. 4.

It may be mentioned here that the Applicant herein has been held guilty of offence under Section 302 of IPC. The Applicant is a native of Uttar Pradesh. The earlier bail application filed by him was withdrawn vide order dated 16th January, 2015. The present application is filed mainly on the ground of marriage ceremony of the brother of the Applicant.

5.

Ms. Shinde, the learned APP, has brought to our notice that the xerox copy of the invitation card does not even mention the address or venue of the wedding. The genuineness of the said wedding card is very much in question. Even otherwise, considering the gravity of the offence as well as the material on record, vis-a-vis the fact that

the Applicant is a native of Uttar Pradesh, in our considered view, this is not a fit case for granting temporary bail on the ground stated by the Applicant.

6.

Hence, no case is made out for grant of temporary bail. The application is dismissed.

(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) (RANJIT MORE, J.)