Shahrukhkhan S/O. Kalimkhan And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 8752 Bom

                                                                       918-APPLN-579-20.odt



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                      CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 579 OF 2020
                                      IN
                        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 160 OF 2020

1. Shahrukhkhan s/o Kalimkhan
   Age: 27 years, Occu.; Labour,
   R/o Hatjodi, Chouphala, Nanded

2. Salmankhan @ Rahim s/o Salimkhan
   Age: 27 years, Occu.: Labour,
   R/o Hatjodi, Chouphla, Nanded

3. Shaikh Saddam s/o Shaikh Mazhar
   Age: 23 years, Occu.: Labour
   R/o Sailabnagar, Khadakpura, Nanded
   At present R/o Hatjodi, Chouphala, Nanded              ..APPLICANTS

        VERSUS

State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station,
Itwara, Tq. & Dist. Nanded                                ..RESPONDENT

                                     ....
Mr. B.N. Gadegaonkar, Advocate for applicants
Mr. S.N. Kendre, A.P.P. for respondent - State
                                     ....

                                               CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT, J.
                                               DATED : 03rd JULY, 2021

PER COURT :


1.           This is an application for suspension of substantive sentence of

imprisonment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-2, Nanded in

Sessions Case No. 144 of 2013 vide judgment and order dated 20 th January,

2020.

                                       1 / 3



        ::: Uploaded on - 05/07/2021                 ::: Downloaded on - 05/07/2021 23:48:26 :::
                                                                        918-APPLN-579-20.odt




2.          The applicants have been convicted for the offences punishable

under Sections 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The

applicants are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and

to pay fine of Rs.8,000/- each, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for

six months.



3.          Heard. Learned counsel for the applicants took me through the

relevant evidence and urged for suspension of execution of sentence of

imprisonment.



4.          Learned A.P.P. strongly opposed the application.



5.          The applicants were on bail pending trial. The appeal is not likely

to come up for final hearing in the near future. I am, therefore, inclined to

allow the application as under :-


                                      ORDER

(i) Criminal application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (B)

(ii) Pending the appeal, the substantive sentence of imprisonment shall stand suspended. The applicants be released on bail on their executing P.R. bonds in the sum of Rs.15,000/-

2 / 3

918-APPLN-579-20.odt

(Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each with one surety in the like amount.

(iii) Bail before the trial Court.

( R.G. AVACHAT, J. ) SSD

3 / 3