Bombay High Court
Shri. Shaliwahan Mukund ... vs Union Of India And Anr on 26 August, 2021
Bench: Prakash Deu Naik
1 of 3 16.IA.436.2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.436 OF 2021
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.361 OF 2020
Shaliwahan Mukund Solegaonkar Applicant
versus
Union of India and another Respondents
Mr.Manoj Mohite, Senior Advocate, i/by Mr.Chaitanya Pendse,
Adocate for applicant.
Mr.H.S.Venegavkar, 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 and grant of
bail. The applicant (accused no.1) is convicted for the offence
punishable under Sections 409, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay
fine of Rs.50,000/-. He is also convicted for the offences punishable
under Sections 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act
and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years and to
pay fine of Rs.50,000/-. The accused no.4 Rakesh Chandrakant
Jadhav was convicted for the offence u/s.120-B r/w 409 of Indian
Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three
years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-.
Digitally signed by
MANISH MANISH SURESH
SURESH THATTE
Date: 2021.08.30 16:02:36
THATTE +0530
2. The accused no.4 (appellant no.2) in the present appeal had
preferred interim application No.1 of 2020 which has been allowed
2 of 3 16.IA.436.2021.doc
by this Court vide order dated 28 th August 2020 on the ground that
sentence awarded is three years rigorous imprisonment. The
maximum sentence awarded to the applicant in the present case is to
suffer imprisonment for four years.
3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that the sentence is of
short term. The appeal would not come up for final hearing
immediately. The applicant has good case on merits. The
application preferred by the co-accused seeking suspension of
sentence has been allowed. It is submitted that the applicant
undertakes to deposit fine amount in all the cases as a condition
precedent for his release on bail on suspension of sentence.
4. Mr.Venegavkar, learned Advocate for respondent no.1 CBI,
submitted that in one case amongst all these cases in which applicant
has been convicted and applicant has been sentenced to suffer
imprisonment of ten years.
5. The sentence imposed for conviction under Sections 409, 120-
B of IPC is three years and the sentence imposed for offence
punishable under Sections 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of
Corruption Act is four years. The accused no.4 Rakesh Jadhav has
been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for three years. The
application preferred by him for suspension of sentence was allowed
by this Court vide order dated 28th August 2020.
6. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, I pass following
order:
3 of 3 16.IA.436.2021.doc
ORDER
(i) The substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed vide
judgment and order dated 18 th February 2020 passed by Special
Judge (CBI-ACB), Pune in Special Case No.80of 2018, is suspended
during pendency of Criminal Appeal No.361 of 2020 and the
applicant is directed to be released on bail on executing PR bond in
the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;
(ii) The deposit of fine amount in all the cases which is to the tune
of Rs.24,00,000/- is condition precedent for the release of applicant
on bail on suspension of sentence of imprisonment;
(iii) The applicant is permitted to furnish cash security of
Rs.25,000/- before Trial Court for a period of eight weeks after
which the applicant shall furnish PR/SB as above;
(iv) Interim Application stand disposed of.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
MST
