Bombay High Court
Piraji Laxman Satpute vs The State Of Maharashtra on 4 June, 2021
Bench: V. V. Kankanwadi
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
915 CRIMINAL APPLN/1147/2021
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL/279/2021
PIRAJI LAXMAN SATPUTE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
...
Advocate for Applicant-Appellant : Mr. Rathi Swapnil S.
Mrs. RP Gour, APP for Respondent-State
-----
CORAM : SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI,J.
DATE : 4th June, 2021.
(VACATION COURT)
PER COURT :-
1. Heard learned Advocate and learned APP
appearing for respective parties.
2. In this Criminal Application, the
applicant prays for suspension of substantive
sentences and releasing him on bail during pendency
and final hearing of the Criminal Appeal.
3. The applicant is the original accused in
Special Case No.88/2020, who has been convicted
and sentenced, by learned Extra Jt. District Judge
and Judge, Special Court (POCSO) Jalna, vide
judgment and order dated 1st April, 2021, thus, -
a) For the offence punishable under
Section 354 of IPC and sentenced to
suffer R.I. for two years,and to pay fine
::: Uploaded on - 04/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 04/06/2021 23:55:38 :::
(2)
of Rs.2,000/-, in default,R.I. for two
months;
b) For the offence punishable under
Section 354A(i) of IPC and sentenced to
suffer R.I. for two years, and to pay
fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, R.I. for
two months;
c) For the offence punishable under
under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced to
suffer R.I. for three years and to pay
fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, R.I. for
three months;
d) For the offence punishable under
Section 7 read with Section 8 of POCSO
Act and sentenced to suffer R.I. for two
years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, in
default, R.I. for three months; and
e) For the offence under Section 11(i)
read with Section 12 of POCSO Act and
sentenced to suffer R.I. for two years
and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, in
default, R.I. for three months.
. All the sentences are ordered to run
concurrently.
. Out of fine amount, an amount of Rs.
5,000/- is ordered to be paid to the
::: Uploaded on - 04/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 04/06/2021 23:55:38 :::
(3)
victim as compensation.
4. It is vehemently submitted on behalf of
the applicant that the during the course of the
trial, the applicant was on bail and he did not
misuse the liberty and further the learned trial
Court has also suspended the sentence till filing
of the appeal. The applicant has also deposited
the fine amount. The punishment so awarded is a
short term sentence and, therefore, the applicant
deserves to be granted the benefit as observed by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kiran Kumar
Vs. State of M.P. The prosecution has utterly
failed to prove charge levelled against the
applicant by a cogent and reliable evidence on
record and the conviction is not sustainable in law
and facts of the case. Consequently, the applicant
prays for releasing him on bail by suspending the
substantive sentences awarded by the learned
Sessions Judge on such terms and conditions as this
Court may deem fit and proper.
5. Per contra, learned APP vociferously
resisted the application and supported the reasons
assigned by the learned Sessions Judge while
convicting and imposing the sentences against the
applicant. The learned APP submitted that the case
is based on the direct as well as other evidence.
The learned Sessions Judge has properly scanned
scrutinized the evidence brought on record. It is,
therefore, submitted that the application being
sans merit, deserves to be dismissed and it be
::: Uploaded on - 04/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 04/06/2021 23:55:38 :::
(4)
dismissed accordingly.
6. As it appears from the impugned judgment
of the learned Sessions Judge, particularly the
sentences, that have been awarded against the
applicant for several offences, are the short-term
sentences. In view of the decision in the case of
Kiran Kumar Vs. State of M.P. - (2001) 9 SCC 211,
benefit will have to be extended to the applicant-
appellant when he has demonstrated that the
material and significant points raised by him in
the appeal are required to be considered at the
time of final hearing of the appeal. Further, the
applicant was on bail throughout the trial, has not
misused his liberty and he had also deposited the
fine amount. In view of the matter, it can be said
that a case is definitely made out for releasing
the applicant on bail by suspending the substantive
sentence during pendency and final disposal of the
appeal. Hence, following order,-
ORDER
i. The Criminal Application stands
allowed.
ii. The substantive sentence imposed
on the applicant by learned Extra Jt.
District Judge and Judge, Special Court
(POCSO) Jalna, vide judgment and order
dated 1st April, 2021, in Special Case
No.88/2020, is hereby suspended till
hearing and final disposal of the appeal.
iii. The applicant - be released on
executing PR and SB of Rs.25,000/
(Rupees fifty thousand) each.
iv. The applicant shall not commit
any criminal activity.
v. The applicant shall remain
present before the learned Trial Judge
once in six months, till final hearing
and disposal of the appeal, commencing
from the date he tenders bail papers and,
thereafter, the Trial Judge to fix dates
for their subsequent appearances.
vi. In case of two consecutive
defaults on the part of the applicant to
remain present before the Trial Court,
the Trial Court to inform this Court
about the same and in that eventuality,
the prosecution would be at liberty to
file an application for cancellation of
the bail granted to the applicant.
vii. Bail before the Sessions Court.
(SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI)
JUDGE
BDV
