Bombay High Court
Sudhakar Bhikaji Badgujar vs State Of Maharashtra on 14 March, 2023
Bench: Bharati Dangre
1/3 5 apeal 270-23.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 280 of 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 951 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 280 OF 2023
Sudhakar Bhikaji Badgujar .. Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr .. Respondents
...
Mr. Ganesh Gole i/b Ateet Shirodkar for the appellant.
Ms.P.N. Dabholkar, APP for the State.
API Vasant Khatoge from Ambad police station, Nashik city
present.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.
DATED : 14th MARCH 2023
P.C:-
1 Admit. Call for Record and Proceedings.
Interim Application No.951/2023
2 By the present application, the applicant seek
suspension of sentence imposed upon him by the Sessions Judge
at Nashik on 15/2/2023, whereby convicting him of the offence
punishable u/s.353 r/w Section 34 IPC and Section 37(1)(3) r/w
Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.
Tilak
2/3 5 apeal 270-23.doc
2 Pursuant to the said conviction, he has been
sentenced to suffer RI for a period of one year and pay fine of
Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer RI for three months, for conviction
u/s.371(1) r/w Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, a
sentence of six months has been imposed along with fine of
Rs.1,000/-.
3 The learned counsel for the applicant would submit
that the applicant came to be released on bail by the Sessions
Court by order dated 15/2/2023, considering the punishment of
one year being awarded.
4 Heard learned counsel Mr.Gole for the applicant and
the learned APP Ms.Dabholkar for the State, and perused the
impugned judgment along with the notes of evidence that has
been placed on record.
5 Apart from the fact that the sentence imposed upon
convicting the applicant is of the period of one year Rigorous
Imprisonment, I could notice the inconsistency in the case of the
prosecution, as what has been placed before the Magistrate when
the offence punishable u/s.353 was triable by the Magistrate and
the evidence of the witnesses before the Sessions Court, upon the
case being transferred to Sessions Court, when the sentence
imposed by Maharashtra Amendment for conviction u/s.353 has
been enhanced to five years. Apart from this, prima facie, the
finding recorded by Sessions Judge himself in paragraph no.26,
Tilak
3/3 5 apeal 270-23.doc
will have to be construed in the light of the evidence, which
appear to be contrary.
The admissions given by PW 2, the complainant
before the Magistrate, run exactly contrary to his deposition,
when he was examined before the Sessions Court as PW No.1.
6 In any case, for appreciating the arguments of
perversity in the judgment, the Appeal deserve a hearing in detail.
However, considering the minuscule nature of the punishment
imposed, I deem it appropriate to grant the application by
suspending the sentence by continuing the order passed by the
Sessions Court, on which the applicant was released on bail.
The order shall continue to remain in operation till
disposal of the Appeal.
Interim Application disposed off.
( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
Tilak
