Ajay S/O Badrinarayan Soni And ... vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Chimur ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 8852 Bom

1/3                                                                 43 revn. 194.22.odt..odt




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

               CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.194 OF 2022
                         Ajay s/o Badrinarayan Soni and another
                                          VS.
             State of Maharashtra through PSO, PS, Chimur, Dist. Chandrapur
Office     Notes,    Office                        Court's or Judge's orders
Memoranda of Coram,
Appearances, court's orders
or      directions     and
Registrar's orders
                              Shri R.M. Daga, Advocate for the applicants.
                              Shri M.J. Khan, APP for the non-applicant/State.


                                  CORAM :      G. A. SANAP, J.

                                   DATE :      06.09.2022



                   1.              Heard.
                   2.              Admit.

3. Learned Advocate for the applicants shall file the private paper book.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.271 OF 2022.

1. The applicants by filing this revision application have challenged the impugned judgment and order dated 21.07.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Warora, whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the applicants against their conviction and sentence passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chimur.

2. The appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 419 and 420 read with Section 2/3 43 revn. 194.22.odt..odt

34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for three years on each count and fine of Rs.2000/- each.

3. Learned Advocate for the applicants submits that the grounds of challenge to the impugned order have been set out in the revision application. Learned Advocate submits that applicants have a good case on merits. Learned Advocate submits that finding recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, is perverse, inasmuch as learned Additional Sessions Judge has not properly appreciated the evidence. Learned Advocate submitted that therefore, during the pendency of the revision application the substantive sentence awarded on different counts may be suspended. Learned Advocate submits that applicants have deposited the fine amount.

4. Learned APP for the non-applicant/State submits that both the courts below have recorded sound and convincing reasons. In short, learned APP opposed the application by contending that the order impugned in this revision application is well reasoned order.

5. It is to be noted that during the pendency of appeal against conviction and sentence awarded by learned Magistrate, the applicants were released on bail. There is no allegation or grievance of misuse of the liberty granted to the applicants by the Court. Perusal of the grounds of challenge to the impugned order would indicate that the order impugned has been assailed on various grounds.

3/3 43 revn. 194.22.odt..odt

6. In view of the challenge raised to the impugned order, the revision application would be required to be heard on merits. In my view, therefore, pending the revision application the prayer for suspension of substantive sentence can be granted.

7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The substantive term sentence as mentioned above shall remain suspended during the pendency of the revision application, on the applicants furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety in like amount before the trial Court (Judicial Magistrate, First Class Chimur).

JUDGE

manisha

Signed By:MANISHA ALOK SHEWALE

Signing Date:06.09.2022 17:56