Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3839 Bom
Judgement Date : 18 April, 2023
1 Cri.Appln 1562.23 production
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
1 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1562 OF 2023
IN APEAL/353/2023
1. Balaji Munjaji Shinde (A-5)
2. Navnath Dattabuwa Bharti (A-7)
3. Balgir Khushalgir Giri (A-8) ...Applicants
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
...
Advocate for the applicants : Dr. Nandedkar Sahebrao G.
APP for Respondent-State : Ms. R.P.Gaur
...
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1563 OF 2023
IN APEAL/354/2023
1. Shrikant Laxmikant Pathak
2. Sandeep Ramchandra Chapanwar
(Chaparwal)
3. Bhayya @ Purushottam Ramji Sharma ...Applicants
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
...
Advocate for the applicants : Mr. Suraj R. Bagal
APP for Respondent-State : Ms.R.P.Gaur
...
::: Uploaded on - 18/04/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 19/04/2023 22:21:05 :::
2 Cri.Appln 1562.23 production
CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT, J.
DATE : 18.04.2023.
PER COURT :
1. It is informed by the learned Advocates appearing for
the applicants that the copies of the judgment of conviction
have not yet been supplied to any of the appellants/applicants.
It is also informed that only an operative order of conviction and
consequent sentence was passed on 11.04.2023 and the copies
thereof have been supplied only to four of the applicants.
2. Perusal of the order impugned herein indicates that
the applicants have been convicted for various offences and
consequently sentenced to certain terms of imprisonments. The
maximum term of imprisonment which the applicants are
supposed to undergo is 5 years. The applicants are in jail since
the date of impugned order i.e. from 11.04.2023. It is also
informed that the judgment of conviction has yet not been
uploaded.
::: Uploaded on - 18/04/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 19/04/2023 22:21:05 :::
3 Cri.Appln 1562.23 production
3. Believing on the submissions made by the learned
Advocates for the applicants, the applications deserve to be
allowed.
4. The learned APP has strong reservations for allowing
applications without affording an opportunity to him of being
heard, since neither the copies of the applications nor the
impugned order is supplied to him.
5. The learned APP may be justified in his contention.
However, the submissions made by the learned Advocates
appearing for the applicants lead this Court to allow all the
applications. Hence the order :
ORDER
(a) All the applications are allowed.
(b) Pending the appeals, the execution of substantive sentences of
imprisonment imposed upon the applicants by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-1, Nanded, in Sessions Case No. 358 of 2019, by the
judgment and order dated 11.04.2023, to stand suspended. The
applicants be released on bail on their executing P.R. bond in the
sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each, with one
4 Cri.Appln 1562.23 production
surety each in the like amount.
6. The Advocates for the applicants even urged for
suspension of the order of conviction. The same cannot be
decided at this stage, unless the entire evidence is gone through
and the learned APP is heard in that regard. The applicants are
at liberty to move such applications.
7. The parties to act upon the authenticated copy of
this order.
( R. G. AVACHAT ) JUDGE
mahajansb/
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!