Bombay High Court
Shantilal Tarachand Chauhan vs Central Bureau Of Investigation ... on 27 June, 2022
Bench: R.P. Mohite-Dere, Virendrasingh Gyansingh Bisht
25-APPA-789 & 790-2019.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 789 OF 2019
(FOR BAIL)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 790 OF 2019
(FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE)
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 731 OF 2019
Shantilal Tarachand Chouhan ...Applicant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. M. M. Chaudhri for the Applicant
Mr. H. S. Venegavkar for the Respondent No.1-CBI
Mr. A. R. Kapadnis, A.P.P for the Respondent No. 2-State
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
V. G. BISHT, JJ.
MONDAY, 27th JUNE 2022
P.C. :
1 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
SQ Pathan 1/6
::: Uploaded on - 29/06/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 29/06/2022 22:27:04 :::
25-APPA-789 & 790-2019.doc
2 By these applications, the applicant seeks suspension of his
sentence and enlargement on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal
of the appeal.
3 The applicant (original accused No.5), along with other co-
accused, vide judgment and order dated 26th April 2019 passed by learned
Special Judge (CBI), Greater Bombay, in Special Case No. 69/2005, has
been convicted and sentenced as under:-
- for the offence punishable under Section 420 r/w 120B of the
Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and
to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo
simple imprisonment for 2 years;
- for the offence punishable under Section 466 of the Indian
Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay
fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple
imprisonment for 2 years;
SQ Pathan 2/6
::: Uploaded on - 29/06/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 29/06/2022 22:27:04 :::
25-APPA-789 & 790-2019.doc
- for the offence punishable under Section 467 of the Indian
Penal Code, to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of
Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple
imprisonment for two years;
- for the offence punishable under Section 468 of the Indian
Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay
fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple
imprisonment for 1 years;
- for the offence punishable under Section 471 of the Indian
Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay
fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple
imprisonment for six months;
- for the offence punishable under Section 419 of the Indian
Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay
fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple
imprisonment for 6 months;
SQ Pathan 3/6
::: Uploaded on - 29/06/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 29/06/2022 22:27:04 :::
25-APPA-789 & 790-2019.doc
- for the offence punishable under Section 120B of the Indian
Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay
fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple
imprisonment for 2 years.
All the aforesaid sentences were directed to run concurrently.
4 The allegation as against the applicant is that he impersonated
a non-existing person for some property documents and also submitted
forged documents to the Bank, on the basis of which, credit facility was
given by the Bank. It appears that there are 8 accused in the said case, who
faced trial. The applicant, alongwith 4 other accused (private individuals);
co-accused - Bhagwanji Dayaram Joshi (original accused No.6), who was
working as an Assistant General Manager, Bank of India, Mandavi Branch;
accused No.7-G.K. Sarma, also a Bank Officer [Processing Officer
(Credit)], who expired during the pendency of the appeal and accused
No.8-Yunus Memon, who was a Lawyer on the Bank's Panel, were all
prosecuted for the aforesaid offences.
SQ Pathan 4/6
::: Uploaded on - 29/06/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 29/06/2022 22:27:04 :::
25-APPA-789 & 790-2019.doc
5 This Court, vide order dated 21 st March 2022, suspended co-
accused Bhagwanji's sentence and enlarged him on bail on certain terms
and conditions. Similarly, sentence of accused No.8 Yunus Memon (a
Lawyer) was suspended and he was enlarged on bail. It is not in dispute
that the credit facility of Rs.2.50 lakhs given to the accused was
subsequently repaid by them. It is not in dispute that the applicant was on
bail pending trial and has not misused or abused the liberty granted to him,
whilst on bail. The appeal has been admitted vide order dated 15th May
2019 and the same is not likely to be heard in the immediate near future.
The sentences of the similarly placed co-acccused, who were also
convicted for the said offences, have been suspended and they are enlarged
on bail.
6 Considering the aforesaid, the applications are allowed and the
applicant's sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail, pending the
hearing and final disposal of his appeal, on the following terms and
conditions :
SQ Pathan 5/6
::: Uploaded on - 29/06/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 29/06/2022 22:27:04 :::
25-APPA-789 & 790-2019.doc
ORDER
(i) The applicant be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in
the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;
(ii) The applicant shall deposit his passport, if any, with the
Investigating Officer before his release on bail;
(iii) The applicant shall furnish his residential address and contact
number to the Investigating Officer, before his release on bail;
(iv) The applicant shall report to the Investigating Agency's Office
at Mumbai, once in two months, till the disposal of his appeal.
7 The applications are disposed of accordingly.
8 All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
V. G. BISHT, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
SQ Pathan 6/6
