Bombay High Court
Shrikant Prabhakar Patange vs The State Of Maharashtra on 18 March, 2021
Bench: V. V. Kankanwadi
935-appln-690-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.690 OF 2021
IN APEAL/133/2021
SHRIKANT S/O PRABHAKAR PATANGE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
..........
Mr. K. T. Jamdar, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. S. B. Narwade, APP for respondent - State.
..........
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
DATE : 18th March, 2021
ORDER :-
. Present application has been filed by original accused No.1
for suspending the sentence imposed upon him by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Latur in Special Case (ACB) No.06 of 2013 dated
17.02.2021. He has been convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as
the 'P.C. Act') and thereby sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for
three years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to suffer further
imprisonment for six months. Further, he has been convicted for the
offence punishable under Section 13(2) of the P.C. Act and thereby
sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay
fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to suffer further imprisonment for six
(1)
::: Uploaded on - 20/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 20/03/2021 21:25:27 :::
935-appln-690-2021.odt
months.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. K. T. Jamdar for the applicant and
learned APP Mr. S. B. Narwade for the respondent-State.
3. It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that
the applicant has challenged the judgment and order of conviction
passed by the learned Sessions Judge by way of an appeal inter alia on
numerous grounds as set out in the appeal itself and the applicant is
having every hope of success therein. It is further submitted that the
applicant was on bail amid the trial and, there was no complaint against
the applicant during the course of the trial. It is the contention of the
applicant that the material contradictions, omissions, improvements and
admissions given by the prosecution witnesses in their testimonies, were
not taken into consideration by the learned Sessions Judge while
imposing the conviction against the applicant. The learned Advocate
further argued that the sentence imposed upon the applicant by the
learned Special Judge is a short-term sentence. The Trial Court erred in
appreciating the facts, circumstances and the evidence put-forth during
the trial. The learned Advocate further submits that the appeal involves
other legal and technical points/issues, which the applicants/appellants
intend to agitate and address them at the time of final hearing of the
appeal. Consequently, the applicants pray for enlarging them on bail by
(2)
::: Uploaded on - 20/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 20/03/2021 21:25:27 :::
935-appln-690-2021.odt
suspending the substantive sentence imposed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge on such terms and conditions as this Court may deem fit
and proper.
4. Per contra, learned APP strongly resisted the application and
supported the reasons given by the learned Special Judge while
convicting and imposing the sentence against the applicant and it is
stated that the prosecution has proved the offence beyond reasonable
doubt.
5. At the outset, the points which are in favour of the applicant are
that he was on bail throughout the trial and he has not misused the
liberty granted to him. As it appears from the impugned judgment of the
learned Special Judge, particularly the sentence, that has been imposed
against the applicant for the offence, in question, is a short term
sentence, in view of the decision in the case of Kiran Kumar Vs. State of
M.P., [(2001) 9 SCC 211], a benefit will have to be given to the
applicant-appellant when he has demonstrated that the material and
significant points raised by him in the appeal are required to be
pondered at the time of final hearing of the appeal. In this 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, the following order :-
(3)
::: Uploaded on - 20/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 20/03/2021 21:25:27 :::
935-appln-690-2021.odt
ORDER
1. The Criminal Application stands allowed.
2. The substantive sentence, imposed upon the applicant by
learned Additional Sessions Judge-6, Latur in Special Case (ACB)
No.06 of 2013 vide judgment and order dated 17.02.2021, is
hereby suspended till hearing and final disposal of the appeal.
3. The applicant be released on P. R. Bond of Rs.30,000/-
(Rupees thirty thousand) with two sureties of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees
fifteen thousand) each.
4. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
5. 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 paper/s and,
thereafter, the Trial Judge to fix dates for the subsequent
appearances.
6. 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.
7. Bail before the Trial Court.
[SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.]
scm
