Bombay High Court
Shri. Shaliwahan Mukund ... vs Union Of India And Anr on 26 August, 2021
Bench: Prakash Deu Naik
1 of 4 16.IA.431.2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.431 OF 2021
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.364 OF 2020
Shaliwahan Mukund Solegaonkar Applicant
versus
Union of India and another Respondents
Mr.Manoj Mohite, Senior Advocate, i/by Mr.Chaitanya Pendse, Adv
for applicant.
Mr.H.S.Venegaonkar, 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. The
applicant is convicted vide judgment and order dated 18 th February
2020 passed by learned Special Judge, CBI, ACB, Pune in Special
Case No.83 of 2018, for offence under Sections 409, 120B of Indian
Penal Code, and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten
years and to pay fine of Rs.10 lakh, he is also convicted for offences
under Sections 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of Prevention of
Corruption Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for
ten years and fine of Rs.10 lakh.
2. The applicant was working in Bank of Maharashtra at
Hadapsar I.E. Branch from 15th July 2013 to 4th October 2017. The
MANISH
SURESH
Digitally signed by
MANISH SURESH
THATTE
case of prosecution is that he was involved in conspiracy with the co-
Date: 2021.09.04
THATTE 13:03:32 +0530
accused and by creating fake transactions transferred
Rs.2,08,57,615/-.
2 of 4 16.IA.431.2021.doc
3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that during pendency
of trial, the applicant was never arrested. His custody was not
sought for the purpose of investigation. The maximum sentence
awarded while convicting the applicant is for a period of ten years.
In the other cases for which the applicant was tried separately and
convicted, the maximum sentence was four years and the sentence of
imprisonment has been suspended. The accused no.2 has also
preferred appeal against conviction and considering the fact that he
was sentenced to imprisonment for four years, this Court had
suspended the sentence and granted bail to the co-accused. The
applicant has good case on merits. There are discrepancies in
evidence. The applicant is in custody from the date of conviction i.e.
18th February 2020. Reliance is placed upon decision of Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in case of Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and
others Vs. State of Gujarat (1999)4-SCC-421 wherein the Supreme
Court considered the fact that in the event of fixed term of sentence,
the Appellate Court shall consider grant of bail. The applicant
undertakes to deposit the fine amount as a condition precedent for
suspension of sentence. The total fine amount imposed in all the
cases in which he is convicted, is to the tune of Rs.24 lakh.
4. Mr.Venegaonkar appearing for Respondent opposed suspension
of sentence. He submitted that in other cases the sentence is
suspended by considering the fact that sentence of imprisonment
awarded of conviction, was of four years. There is sufficient material
against applicant in the present case to establish prosecution case
and the Trial Court has convicted the applicant. Considering the fact
that huge amount was involved, the applicant has been convicted for
3 of 4 16.IA.431.2021.doc
ten years. In view of the fact that applicant has been sentenced to 10
years imprisonment, only in the event that appeal is not heard, in the
light of Supreme Court judgment, the sentence can be suspended.
Considering the seriousness of the offences for which the applicant is
convicted, sentence may not be suspended.
5. The appeal challenging the judgment of conviction has been
admitted by this Court. The appellant has contended that there are
discrepancies in evidence and there is challenge to the judgment of
conviction. It is pertinent to note that the appellant has been
convicted for separate offences registered while he was being tried
separately wherein the sentence of four years imprisonment was
awarded. In all those cases the appellant has been granted bail by
suspending sentence. The co-accused in this case has also been
granted bail by suspending sentence. In the light of factual aspects
of the matter and also considering the fact that the appeals may not
come up for hearing immediately, the sentence can be suspended and
bail can be granted to the applicant-appellant. Hence, I pass
following order :
ORDER
(i) Interim Application No.431 of 2021 is allowed and disposed
of;
(ii) The sentence of imprisonment imposed vide judgment and
order dated 18th February 2020 passed by Special Judge, CBI, ACB,
Pune in Special Case No.83 of 2018, is suspended during pendency
of Criminal Appeal No.364 of 2020 and the applicant is directed to
be released on bail on executing PR bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
with one or more sureties in the like amount;
(iii) The applicant shall deposit fine amount of Rs.24,00,000/-
4 of 4 16.IA.431.2021.doc
awarded in all the cases as a condition precedent for his release on
bail on suspension of sentence;
(iv) The applicant is permitted to execute provisional cash bail in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- for a period of eight weeks. It should be
substituted by surety within stipulated period.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
MST
