Bombay High Court
Ramchandra S/O Madari Katkamwar vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps, ... on 26 October, 2021
Bench: M.S. Sonak, Pushpa V. Ganediwala
2apeal 444-2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 444 OF 2021
(Ramchandra s/o Madari Katkanwar, Nagpur Vs. State of Maharashtra)
__________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
Shri V.D. Muley, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri S.M. Ghodeswar, A.P.P. for the respondent/ State.
.....
CORAM : M.S. SONAK &
PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.
OCTOBER 26, 2021.
Heard.
2] Admit.
3] Shri S.M. Ghodeswar, learned A.P.P.
waives service of notice for the respondent/ State.
4] Call R & P.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 608/2021.
5] This is an application filed by the
applicant seeking suspension of sentence and grant
of bail pending decision of the aforesaid Appeal,
which has been preferred against the judgment of
conviction dated 24/09/2021 passed by the Special
Judge under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest
of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999
("MPID Act") in Special (MPID) Case No.4/2002,
::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2021 03:11:18 :::
2apeal 444-2021 2
whereby the applicant was convicted for the offence
punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian
Penal Code ("IPC"), Section 3 of the MPID Act and
Sections 45(S) and 58(B)(5-A) of the Reserve Bank
of India Act, 1934 ("Act of 1934") and sentenced to
suffer as under :
Sections Sentence
Section 420 of IPC Five years R.I. with fine of
Rs.10,000/-, in default, to
suffer three months S.I.
Section 406 of IPC Two years R.I. with fine of
Rs.5,000/-, in default, to
suffer one month S.I.
Section 3 of MPID Act Five years R.I. with fine of
Rs.1,00,000/-, in default, to
suffer six months S.I.
Sections 45(S) and 58(B) One year R.I. with fine of
(5-A) of the Act of 1934 Rs.1,000/-, in default, to
suffer fifteen days S.I.
6] Shri Muley, learned counsel for the
applicant, submits that the applicant was on bail
during trial, and that he has deposited amount of
Rs.1,16,000/- on 11/10/2021. He submits that the
applicant is a senior citizen, aged around 76 years,
and thus prayed for releasing him on bail.
7] Shri Ghodeswar, learned A.P.P., fairly
submits to pass an appropriate order considering the
nature of crime and the sentence imposed.
::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2021 03:11:18 :::
2apeal 444-2021 3
8] We have considered the rival
submissions put forth on behalf of both the sides.
9] Considering the fact that the maximum
sentence imposed upon the applicant is of
imprisonment of five years, passed for the offence
punishable under Section 420 of the IPC along with
allied offences as above, so also considering the fact
that the applicant was on bail during trial for about
18 years and that he has not misused his liberty,
coupled with the fact that as the Appeal is of the year
2021 and there is no likelihood of its early disposal,
we are of the opinion that by imposing suitable
conditions, the applicant can be released on bail.
Hence, the following order :
ORDER
i] The Criminal Application is allowed.
ii] The execution of substantive sentence
shall remain suspended, pending decision of this
Appeal.
iii] The applicant be released on bail on his
furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
(rupees fifty thousand) to the satisfaction of the
concerned trial Court.
PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J. M.S. SONAK, J.
Sumit
