Baliram S/O Waman Mandali vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Seloo ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7908 Bom

1/2                                                             32 apeal 370.22.odt




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                          CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.370 OF 2022
                               Baliram s/o Waman Mandali
                                           VS.
         State of Maharashtra through PSO, PS Seloo District Wardha and another
Office     Notes,    Office                    Court's or Judge's orders
Memoranda of Coram,
Appearances, court's orders
or      directions     and
Registrar's orders
             Shri A.C. Dharmadhikari, learned Advocate for the appellant.
             Shri A.R. Chutke, learned APP for the respondent No.1/State.
             Ms Preeti D. Rane, learned Advocate (appointed) for respondent No.2.

                              CORAM :      G. A. SANAP, J.

                               DATE :      12.08.2022


                   1.         Heard.
                   2.         Admit.
                   3.         Call Record and Proceedings.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.447 OF 2022

1. The appellant has made this application for suspension of sentence awarded on two counts by the Extra Joint Additional Session Judge (Special Court), Wardha in Spl (Ch.Act) case No.50/2017.

2. The appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short "POCSO Act") and sentenced to suffer R.I. for three years. He was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for six months. It is pointed out that considering the quantum of the sentence awarded by 2/2 32 apeal 370.22.odt

learned trial Court, on the date of the judgment and order the learned trial Judge was pleased to suspend the sentence. It is submitted that appellant has good case on merits. The detention of the appellant would not be warranted.

3. Learned APP and Ms Preeti D. Rane, learned Advocate appointed for respondent No.2 submit that there is a concrete evidence on record and on the basis of said evidence the appellant has been found guilty.

4. The impugned order is appealable as of right. The appellant has questioned the correctness of the judgment and order passed by learned trial Judge. The grounds of challenge have been set out in the memo of appeal. During the pendency of trial, appellant was on bail. There is no allegation that the appellant during pendency of trial misused the liberty granted by the Court.

5. In my opinion, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and proper to suspend the sentence. The appeal may take its time for final adjudication.

6. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The substantive sentence awarded on two counts as above shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal. The bail furnished by the appellant in terms of the interim order shall continue.

7. The Criminal Application stands disposed of.

Signed By:MANISHA ALOK JUDGE SHEWALE

manisha Signing Date:12.08.2022 19:08