Prashant Ramchandra Gulhane And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3428 Bom

                                       1                     942-CRA-114-2023.odt




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1389 OF 2023
                                IN
           CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.114 OF 2023

            SHAIKH FAROOK SHAIKH MEHMOOD AHMED SAB
                              VERSUS
                    THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                               AND
              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1388 OF 2023
                                IN
           CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 115 OF 2022
                   SHAIKH MASTAN SHAIKH MAULA
                              VERSUS
                    THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                     ...
                 Advocate for Applicant : Mr. U. B. Bilolikar
                  APP for Respondent: Mr. S. P. Deshmukh
                                    .....

                                   CORAM :      S. G. MEHARE, J.

                                  DATE      :   06.04.2023

PER COURT :

1.               Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and

the learned A.P.P for respondent-State.



2.              The learned counsel for the applicants would

submits that the applicants have             good case on merit. The

legal issues have been involved in the matters. The defence

of the applicants has not been properly appreciated.                        They

never misused the bail granted to them.                  Hence, sentence




::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2023                    ::: Downloaded on - 11/04/2023 03:21:47 :::
                                        2                942-CRA-114-2023.odt



may be suspended.


3.     The learned A.P.P. would opposed the applications,

contending that two Courts have recorded the convictions.

There is no mistake or error on the face of the record in the

impugned judgments. Hence, the applicants are not entitled

to suspension of the sentence.


4.     Perused the impugned judgments.                The applicants

appear to have a good case on merits and points to argue in

the revision applications. There were no complaints against

the applicants that they had misused the liberty granted to

them by way of bail during the trial and the appeal.                   They

have already surrendered their bail bonds. In the facts and

circumstances of the case the discretion under Section 389

of the Code of Criminal Procedure may be exercised. Hence,

the following order :



                               ORDER

(i) Both the applications are allowed.

(ii) The execution of the sentence to sufer rigorous

imprisonment for two years for the ofence punishable under

Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code

3 942-CRA-114-2023.odt

imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, F.C. Dharmabad

in Regular Criminal Case No. 11 of 2016 and confrmed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Biloli by common

judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 2017 and 16 of 2017

dated 31.07.2017 is suspended till the conclusion of the

revision application.

(iii) The applicants shall be released on bail on executing

P.B. and S. B. of Rs. 50,000/- each with one solvent surety of

the like amount each.

(iv) Bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Biloli.

( S. G. MEHARE ) JUDGE

ysk