Bombay High Court
Madhukar @ Madhusudan Sambhaji Mohurle vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso, Parwa, Tq. ... on 23 January, 2024
Author: M. W. Chandwani
Bench: M. W. Chandwani
2024:BHC-NAG:974
1 27-apeal-463-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 730 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 463 OF 2023
Madhukar @ Madhusudan Sambhaji Mohurle
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and another
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
Shri V. D. Darne, Advocate for applicant.
Shri S. A. Ashirgade, APP for non-applicant no. 1/State.
Ms. C. S. Bhute, Advocate (appointed) for non-applicant no. 2.
CORAM :- M. W. CHANDWANI, J.
DATED :- 23.01.2024
Heard.
2. The applicant has filed this application for
seeking suspension of the substantive sentence passed by
the learned Judge, Special Court, Yavatmal vide
judgment and order dated 20.06.2023 in Special Case
No. 72/2021. The applicant has been convicted for the
offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal
Code (IPC) and under Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 (for short, "Atrocity Act") and is sentenced to
suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and 1 year,
respectively.
RR Jaiswal
2 27-apeal-463-23.odt
3. The accused was charge-sheeted on the
allegations that he assaulted two ASHA workers, by
means of 'Satoor', who belongs to reserve category.
Therefore, he was put on trial for the aforesaid offences
and by the impugned judgment, the learned Special
Judge convicted him for the aforesaid offences and
directed to suffer the sentence mentioned above.
4. It is contention of the learned counsel for the
applicant that the applicant was Up-Sarpanch of the said
village and he has been implicated due to political rivalry.
The weapon has not been seized from the applicant and
he has undergone more than half of the sentence
awarded. The applicant has been sentenced to suffer
rigorous imprisonment for a fixed term of five years.
Hence, it is submitted that the substantive sentence can
be suspended.
5. Per contra, the learned APP for the State and
the learned counsel for non-applicant no. 2 vehemently
submitted that the applicant attacked the victims in a
broad day light incident and by means of 'Satoor',
wherein both the victims sustained injuries. Accordingly,
both the injured victims deposed about the details of the
incident. The weapon was seized from the person, who
had snatched the weapon from the applicant. It is
contended that one of the injured victim is a widow and
if the applicant is released on bail, on suspending the
RR Jaiswal
3 27-apeal-463-23.odt
sentence, he will create trouble for that injured victim.
Hence, sought rejection of the application.
6. With the able assistance of the learned
counsel for the applicant as well as the learned APP
assisted by learned counsel for the non-applicant no. 2,
I perused the evidence of the injured victims as well the
Doctor, who examined the victims. A case is made out
for consideration of evidence in detail at the time of
hearing of the appeal. The applicant has been convicted
for a fixed term, which is a relatively shorter term. The
applicant has already undergone more than half of the
sentence awarded to him. The appeal may not be heard
in the near future therefore, a case is made out of
suspension of the substantive sentence awarded to the
applicant.
7. Sofaras, the anxiety of the learned APP for
State that the appellant is resident of the same village
and may create terror on the victims, one of them is a
widow is concerned, in my view this can be addressed by
putting the applicant on terms. Hence, the following
order:-
i) The application is allowed.
ii) During the pendency of the appeal, the
substantive sentence passed by the learned Judge, Special
Court, Yavatmal vide judgment and order dated
20.06.2023 in Special Case No. 72/2021 shall remain
suspended.
RR Jaiswal
4 27-apeal-463-23.odt
iii) The applicant be released on he executing a
PR bond of ₹50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand) with one or50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand) with one or
two solvent surety in the like amount.
iv) The applicant shall not enter the villge
Sayatkharda, Tah. Ghatangi, District Yavatmal till the
disposal of the appeal.
The Registry is directed to process the appeal
and list the matter as per rule.
(M. W. CHANDWANI, J.)
Signed by: Mr. Rajnesh Jaiswal
RRToJaiswal
Designation: PA Honourable Judge
Date: 24/01/2024 18:21:07
