Maharukh Zarir Suraliwala v. The State Of Maharashtra

916-appp946-17.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 946 OF 2017 Maharukh Zarir Suraliwala ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Angad R.More i/b Adv. Sandeep R.Karnik for the applicant.

Mr. J.S.Lohokare , APP for the State.

CORAM:

A.M. BADAR, J.

DATED:

13th OCTOBER, 2017 PC:- 1.

Heard the learned advocate appearing for the applicant as well as the learned APP for the State. 2.

The learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that because of old age the applicant is not in position to arrange for surety as directed by this Court vide order dated 14th July, 2017 in bail application No.1273 of 2017. 3.

The learned APP opposed the application.

Kavita Page 1 of 2

916-appp946-17.doc 4.

I have considered submissions so advanced. The applicant has already been convicted of the offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code and she is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for five years apart from payment of fine of Rs.50,000/-. She is also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 66(C) of the Information Technology Act and for this offence she is sentenced to suffer 3 years imprisonment with a fine of Rs.50,000/-. Averements are to the effect that the applicant played major role in committing criminal breach of trust of the amount involved which is more than Rs.1.60 crores. 5.

In this view of the matter, I do not feel it appropriate to grant prayer clause-'a' of the application by relaxing condition to furnish surety. However, the application is disposed of by granting 8 more weeks time to the applicant to furnish surety.

(A.M. BADAR, J ) Kavita Page 2 of 2