Ramesh S/O Malaya Itgurla vs State Of Mah. Thru. Pso Sironcha
2021 Latest Caselaw 5795 Bom

apeal22.09.odt                                                                                  1/3



                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                    CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) No.143 OF 2021
                                       IN
                          CRIMINAL APPEAL No.22 OF 2009

  (Ramesh s/o. Malaya Itgurla Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through PSO, PS Sironcha,
                       Tahsil Sironcha, Distt. Gadchiroli)
__________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions            Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
                       Shri R.R. Vyas, counsel for applicants.
                       Smt. S.S. Jachak, APP for respondent.

                       CORAM : VINAY JOSHI, J.

DATE : MARCH 31, 2021.

Hearing was conducted through Video Conferencing and the learned Counsel agreed that the audio and visual quality was proper.

2. This is a joint application filed by the convict Ramesh Itgurla along with victim of crime for compounding of offences and for setting aside conviction on said premise. It is stated that both of them have settled the matter out of the Court and, therefore, seeks permission to compound the offences and consequently to set aside the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Sessions Court in Sessions Case No.153/2007 and confirmed with certain modification by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.22/2009.

3. On last date, when the matter came before this Court, it was a Court query, whether this application under Section 320 of the Code is maintainable post conviction.

apeal22.09.odt 2/3

Moreover, it was inquired as to whether the convicted accused Ramesh has surrendered himself. So also a question was put. Whether offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code is compoundable ? On such a query, Shri Vyas, the learned Counsel for applicants submitted that the accused will surrender himself on or before next date and would also satisfy this Court on the point of maintainability of the application. On second query Advocate Shri Vyas has submitted that the offence took place in the year 2009 and at relevant time offence punishable under Section 354 was of compoundable nature.

4. Today, Advocate Shri Vyas has submitted that the accused has not surrendered himself hence stated that he would seek circulation as and when accused would surrender. Since as on date Advocate Shri Vyas is not seeking any relief, it is not necessary to make any comment on the maintainability of this application post conviction. However, by this application it has come to the notice of this Court that despite suffering order of conviction the accused is moving freely. In normal course after dismissal of appeal by this Court, the accused should be in jail unless indulgence is shown by Supreme Court.

5. Initially, the accused Ramesh was charged for commission of offences punishable under Sections 376 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. After full-fledged trial, learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused for both offences and imposed sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years along with total fine of Rs.200/-. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction, the accused Ramesh has filed Criminal Appeal No.22/2009 before this Court. After

apeal22.09.odt 3/3

hearing both sides, this Court was pleased to partly allow the appeal. On modification the accused was held guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 451 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year along with total fine of Rs.3,000/-. The said order in appeal was passed by this Court on 8 th September, 2020 i.e. prior to six months. In fact, till date the accused either should have surrendered himself or the conviction warrant would have been executed on him.

6. It it not the submission that the accused Ramesh had challenged the order of this Court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the situation, the accused must undergo to sentence which has been imposed by this Court. This applicant occasioned to remind that though the order was passed by this Court, the accused is avoiding to succumb to the order. However, after six months this application for settlement has been filed. Since today no relief is claimed, Advocate Shri Vyas is permitted to circulate as and when he wishes. However, the Court must see that its orders are being implemented in its true letter and spirit. It is not palatable that despite dismissal of appeal by this Court the accused is enjoying free air. In view of that Registry to inform the trial Court to immediately take steps to execute the order of this Court and report compliance within 15 days i.e. on 16th April, 2021. Registrar (Judicial) to take appropriate steps. Matter be placed for compliance on 16.4.2021.

JUDGE Wadode