Abdul Latif Abdul Raheman vs The State Of Maharashtra
2022 Latest Caselaw 13079 Bom

                                                              950-appln-4270-2022.odt
                                      (1)


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                   CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4270 OF 2022
                             IN REVN/364/2022

                      ABDUL LATIF ABDUL RAHEMAN
                                  VERSUS
                      THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                       ...
              Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Gore Ravindra Vitthal
                APP for Respondent/State : Mr. A.A. Jagatkar
                                       ...
                                      CORAM : S.G. MEHARE, J.

                                       DATED : 15th DECEMBER, 2022

 PER COURT:-

 1.               The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Badnapur

 convicted the applicant vide judgment and order dated 07.03.2020

 passed in R.C.C No.5 of 2017 for the offence punishable under

 Section 33 of Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act and sentenced to

 suffer R.I. for two years and fine of Rs.2,000/- and also sentenced to

 suffer R.I. for one year for the offence punishable under Section 36 of

 Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act and fine of Rs.1,000/-. The

 First Appellate Court set aside the conviction under Section 36 of

 Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act; however, confirmed the

 imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 419 of the

 Indian Penal Code and under Section 33 of Maharashtra Medical

 Practitioners Act.




::: Uploaded on - 16/12/2022                   ::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2022 21:58:32 :::
                                                               950-appln-4270-2022.odt
                                      (2)


 2.               Soon after the judgment was pronounced, the Ad-hoc

 District Judge-1 and Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna took the

 applicant in custody for implementing the sentence.

 3.               Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the

 fine amount was already deposited in the Court of Judicial Magistrate

 First Class. The applicant has a good case on merit. Both the Courts

 did not appreciate the evidence properly and misinterpreted the

 provisions of section for which he has been held guilty. The applicant

 is 64 years old. He has roots at Village Dawargaon, Taluka Badnapur.

 He never jumped over the liberty granted to him by the Court.

 Hence, the sentence may be suspended and he may be granted bail.

 4.               The State opposed the application.       The learned APP

 would submit that prima facie the offence is against the society. The

 applicant was practicing medicine unauthorizedly which was harmful

 to the human life. Hence, the sentence may not be suspended and

 bail may be refused.

 5.               Perused the impugned judgment and order. The accused

 has a defence that the applicant was not practicing medicine. The

 raid was conducted in the house. It was not the place of his clinic.

 Unless there is evidence that the applicant runs a clinic, he may not

 be held guilty. Considering the defence raised by the applicant, this

 Court is of the view that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion




::: Uploaded on - 16/12/2022                   ::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2022 21:58:32 :::
                                                                  950-appln-4270-2022.odt
                                          (3)


 under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code.                     Hence, the

 following order :

                                      ORDER

(i) The execution, implementation, effect and operation of the

imprisonment sentencing the accused to suffer R.I. for six months for

the offence punishable under Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code

and R.I. for two years for the offence punishable under Section 33 of

Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act and confirmed by the learned

Ad-hoc District Judge-1 and Addtional Sessions Judge, Jalna in

Criminal Appeal No.23 of 2020 decided on 12.12.2022, is suspended

till the disposal of the revision petition.

(ii) The applicant be released on bail on executing P.B. and S.B. of

Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount.

(iii) Bail before the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-1 and Addtional

Sessions Judge, Jalna.

 (iv)         Stand over to 19.01.2023.




                                                (S.G. MEHARE, J.)




 Mujaheed//