Bombay High Court
Ahmad Arif Khan vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 5 March, 2021
Bench: A.S. Gadkari
ssm 1 27-ia813.21-in-revn60.21.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL I.A. NO. 813 OF 2021
IN
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 60 OF 2021
Ahmad Arif Khan ....Applicant.
Vs.
The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. ....Respondents.
Mr. Rajendra Rathod a/w Mr. Sohail Ahmed for the Applicant.
Smt. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent No.1-State.
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J.
DATE : 5th MARCH, 2021.
P.C.:-
This is an Application for suspension of sentence and releasing
the Applicant on bail.
2 Heard Mr. Rathod, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Smt.
Ambekar, learned APP for the Respondent-State.
3 The Applicant is convicted under Sections 279, 337, 338,
304(A) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 184 of the Motor
Vehicles Act and is sentenced to suffer imprisonment till rising of the Court
and also directed to pay compensation of Rs.2 lakh each to the family
members of deceased Rohit Pravin Mehta and Pranay Narsinha Ghate, by
the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Islampur by its Order dated 30 th
September, 2015, in Summary Criminal Case No. 375 of 2011.
ssm 2 27-ia813.21-in-revn60.21.doc
4 Feeling aggrieved by the sentence of imposition of fine, the
Applicant had preferred Criminal Appeal No.87 of 2015. The father of
deceased Pranay Ghate i.e. Respondent No.2 herein had also preferred
Criminal Appeal No.94 of 2015 for enhancement of sentence.
5 Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Islampur by its common
Judgment and Order dated 25th February, 2021 was pleased to dismiss the
Appeal preferred by the Applicant bearing No.87 of 2015 and allowed the
Appeal preferred by the Respondent No.2 on the point of inadequacy of
sentence. The Appellate Court, by its impugned Judgment and Order has
modified the Judgment and Order passed by the Trial Court and enhanced
sentence of rigorous imprisonment for two years from the sentence of
imposition till rising of the Court. The Appellate Court has also imposed
total fine of Rs.4,000/- upon the Applicant.
6 Mr. Rathod, learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that,
on the date of pronouncement of Judgments and Order itself, the Applicant
has been taken into custody by the Appellate Court for undergoing
sentence. He further submitted that, the Applicant has already deposited
entire fine amount in the Registry of the Appellate Court.
7 The sentence imposed upon the Applicant is short term
sentence and the possibility of hearing of the present Revision Application
on its own merits in near future is remote. In view thereof, the sentence
imposed upon the Applicant can be suspended and he can be released on
ssm 3 27-ia813.21-in-revn60.21.doc
bail.
Hence the following Order:-
a) During the pendency of the present Revision
Application, the substantive sentence imposed upon the
Applicant is suspended.
b) Applicant be released on bail in Summary Criminal Case
No. 375 of 2011, on his furnishing PR bond of
Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
c) After his release from Jail and during the pendency of
the present Revision Application, the Applicant shall
attend Kurlap Police Station, District Sangli on every
first Monday of the month between 10.00 a.m. and
12.00 noon, initially for a period of one year.
Thereafter, the Applicant shall attend the
Kurlap Police Station, District Sangli on every first
Monday of the every 3rd Month between 10.00 a.m. and
12.00 noon. The Applicant thus, shall attend Kurlap
Police Station, District Sangli, 4 times in a year during
the pendency of the present Revision Application.
d) If the Applicant commits two consecutive defaults in
complying with condition No. (c) above, in that event,
the prosecution will be at liberty to file an Application
ssm 4 27-ia813.21-in-revn60.21.doc
for cancellation of bail.
8 Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
(A.S. GADKARI, J.)
Digitally signed
by Sanjiv S.
Sanjiv S. Mashalkar
Mashalkar Date:
2021.03.10
10:22:37 +0530
