Daulatrao Chatru Rathod vs Bhika Badu Chavhan Thr. Lrs. ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 3286 Bom

                                               1

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                     CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.441 OF 2016.


   PETITIONER:                    Daulatrao Chatru Rathod,
                                  aged about 70 years, Occu: Agrist.
                                  R/o Petha (Sudhakar Nagar), Tq. Mahagaon, 
                                  Police Station Mahagaon, Distt.Yavatmal.

                                             : VERSUS :

   RESPONDENT:          Bhika Badu Chavhan,
                        aged abouot 52 years, occu: Agrist.
                        R/o Pokhari (Babasaheb Nagar),
                        Police Station Mahagaon, Distt.Yavatmal.
                        (dead)

                                  Legal Representatives-

                           1.     Smt.Bayanabai wd/o Wd/o Bhika Chavhan,
                                  (wife), Aged __ yrs. Occu: Agriculturist.

                             2.   Santosh s/o Bhika Chavan (son)
                                  aged ___ yrs. Occu: Agriculturist.

                            3.    Kishor s/o Bhika Chavan (son),
                                  aged ___yrs, Occu: Agriculturist.

                            4.    Pravin s/o Bhika Chavan (son),
                                  aged __yrs. Occ: Agriculturist.

                            5.    Sau.Sangita w/o Baliram Rathod (daughter),
                                  aged about ___yrs., Occu: Agriculturist.

                                  All are resident of Babasaheb Nagar, Pokhari (E)
                                  Tq.Mahagaon, Distt.Yavatmal. 




::: Uploaded on - 19/06/2017                              ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2017 00:41:26 :::
                                             2

   -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
   Mr.K.S.Narwade, Advocate for the petitioner.
   Mr.N.S.Deshpande, Advocate for the respondents/L.Rs.
   =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
                                                       CORAM:   P.N.DESHMUKH, J.

                                                       DATED:    16th JUNE, 2017.

   ORAL JUDGMENT:


   1.             Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.     Heard finally by

consent of learned counsel of both the parties.

2. This petition challenges impugned order dated 23rd May,

2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad, by which

substantive sentence of imprisonment is stayed pending appeal subject

to respondent/appellant depositing amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, out of the

fine amount, in the Court. It is the case of petitioner/complainant that

total amount of cheque involved is Rs.2,00,000/- and the learned Trial

Court has, on convicting respondent, granted Rs.4,00,000/- as

compensation. The only grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition

is that, respondent's sentence of imprisonment is suspended by directing

respondent to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- only.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents as well as petitioner,

during the course of hearing submitted that this petition can be

disposed of by issuing directions to learned Appellate Court to decide

the appeal expeditiously.

4. In that view of the matter and having considering the only

question involved in the petition as aforesdaid, Writ petition can be

allowed by passing following order.

-ORDER-

Criminal Writ Petition is allowed.

Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad, who is seized

with the Criminal Appeal No.10 of 2016, shall make an endeavour to

expeditiously decide said appeal and in any event within a period of one

month from the date of receipt of Writ of this Court.

Rule is made absolute in above terms.

JUDGE chute