Bombay High Court
Mohd. Firoz Mohd. Badruddin ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 24 February, 2022
Bench: Prakash Deu Naik
1 of 3 35.IA.483.2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.483 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.131 OF 2022
Mohd. Firoz Mohd. Badruddin Shaikh and anr. Applicants
versus
The State of Maharashtra Respondents
Ms.Anjali Patil, Advocate for applicants.
Mr.S.H.Yadav, APP, for State.
Mr.V.S.Sawant, PSI, Sewree Police Station, present.
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 24th February 2022
PC :
1. The applicants are seeking suspension of sentence and grant of
bail during pendency of Criminal Appeal No.131 of 2022. The
applicants are convicted for offence u/s.379 r/w 120B and 34 of
Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment of three
years. They are also convicted for offence u/s.427 r/w 120B and 34
of IPC, under Section 285 r/w 120B and 34 of IPC, under Section
461 r/w 120B and 34 of IPC, under Section 15(2) of Petroleum and
Minerals Pipeline Act r/w Sections 34 and 120B of IPC, under
Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act r/w 120B
and 34 of IPC. The maximum sentence imposed is for a period of
seven years. The applicants are acquitted for the offences under
Sections 411, 395 of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4)
of Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act.
MANISH Digitally signed by
MANISH SURESH THATTE
SURESH Date: 2022.02.26 15:03:16
THATTE +0530
2. Learned advocate for applicants submitted that both the
applicants were on bail during pendency of trial, however,
2 of 3 35.IA.483.2022.doc
subsequently provisions of MCOC Act were invoked and hence
applicants have surrendered before the Court and since then for a
period of about six years they are in custody. The maximum
sentence imposed by the Trial Court is of seven years.
3. Learned APP submitted that applicant no.2 was involved in 30
cases. There is sufficient evidence against applicants to prove
charges against them.
4. Learned counsel for applicants submits that report submitted
by police itself mentions that out of 30 cases applicant no.2 has been
acquitted in 27 cases. Three other cases which were registered
against him, are for the offence u/s.32 of IPC and the applicant no.2
is on bail in those cases.
5. It is pertinent to note that applicants are acquitted under the
provisions of MCOC Act. The applicants were granted bail. However,
on applying the provisions of MCOC Act, the applicants have
surrendered and they are in custody. The maximum sentence
imposed by the Trial Court is seven years and out of which the
applicants have undergone six years of imprisonment. As stated
above, the report submitted by police states that the applicant no.2
has been acquitted in majority of the cases. In the circumstances,
case for suspension of sentence is made out. Hence, I pass following
order:
ORDER
(i) Interim Application is allowed and disposed of;
(ii) The sentence of imprisonment imposed vide judgment and
order dated 29th January 2022 by Additional Sessions Judge and
3 of 3 35.IA.483.2022.doc
Special Judge under MCOC/NIA/POTA/Act, Greater Mumbai in
MCOC Special Case No.10 of 2016 is suspended and the applicants
are directed to be released on executing PR bond in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount;
(iii) The applicants are permitted to furnish cash bail in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- for a period of ten weeks in lieu of sureties;
(iv) The applicants shall attend Trial Court once in six months on
First Saturday of the month till disposal of the Criminal Appeal;
(v) In the event there are two consecutive defaults in attending
the Trial Court, the Trial Court shall submit report to this Court;
(vi) In the event of default committed by the applicants in
attending the Trial Court, the prosecution will be at liberty to prefer
application for cancellation of bail;
(vii) The applicants shall deposit fine amount within four weeks
from the date of release.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
MST
