Disposed

Shri.Changdev Rambhau Ghumare v. Shri.Vijay Rajaram Vidhate and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Aug 2007WP/955/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court addressed three pending criminal wavy petitions challenging the stay on conviction and sentence orders. The Court directed that the relevant criminal appeals be heard and decided on their own merits as expeditiously as possible, specifying a deadline of October 31, 2007.

What did the court decide?

Directed Criminal Appeal Nos. 43, 44, and 45 of 2005 to be heard and decided on merits before 31-10-2007; staying the order dated 11-4-2007.

Shri.Changdev Rambhau Ghumare Vs Shri.Vijay… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

:1:

¶2

IN THE	HIGH CO APPELLATE	URT OF	JUDICAT	URE	AT B JURIS	OMBAY DICTION
CRIMINAL	WRIT	PETITION WITH	NO.	955	OF	2007
CRIMINAL CRIMINAL	WRIT WRIT	PETITION WITH PETITION	NO. NO.	956 957	OF OF	2007 2007

¶3

Shri Changdev Rambhau Ghumare

¶4

..Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Shri Vijay Rajaram Vidhate and anr. ..Respondents

¶7

Mr. Prakash Naik i/by Mr. T.N. Sonawane for petitioner.

¶8

Ms. Deepa Malwankar h/f Mr. J.N. Pawar for respondent no.1.

¶9

Mr. D.R. More, APP for State.

¶10

CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. Date : August 22, 2007. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Naik the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Malwankar h/f Mr. Pawar the learned counsel for the respondent no.1. The learned APP appears for the respondent no.2-State. 2. S.C.C. No. 1459/02, S.C.C. No.2930/02 and S.C.C. No.5217/02 were filed against the present

¶11

:2:

¶12

petition	er	for	the	offence	punis	hable	under	Section
138	of	the	Negotiable	Instrum	ents	Act,	1881	and all
the	complaints	have	been	allowed	by	the	trial	court as
per	the	order	dated	20/4/	2005.		The	compensation

¶13

amount granted by the trial court in all these three

¶14

complaints comes to Rs.86,83,000/-.

¶15

3.		The a	ccused, t	herefore, filed three cr	iminal
appeals	i.e.		Crimi	nal Appeal No	s.43,	44	and 45	of
2005	before		the	Sessions Court	and	the	appeals	have
been	admitted.		On	30/4/2005	the	learne	d II	Adhoc
Additional		Sess	ions	Judge, Nasi	k,	while	admitting	the
appeals,	stay	ed	the	order of	convic	tion	and	released
the	appellant	on	bail	on execution	of	PR	bond in	the

¶16

sum of Rs.15000 with solvent surety in the like

¶17

amount.

¶18

4.		It appears that	the complainant filed an
application	at	Exh.21	on or about 23/	2/2007	and	prayed
for	fresh	directions	to deposit	the	com	pensation
amount,	as	directed by	the trial court,	in	each of	the
complaints		and this	application came	to	be	partly
allowed	by	the	learned Sessions Judge	at	Nasik	vide
his	order	dated 11/4/2	007. By the said	order	10%	of

¶19

:3:

¶20

the compensation amount has been directed to be deposited so as to continue the stay to the order of sentence.

¶21

5.		Mr. Naik submitted tha	t when the or	der of
conviction		and sentence	was	stayed	unc	onditionally	as
per	the	order dated	30/4/2005	, the	a	pplication	at
Exh.21	was	not maintai	nable to	review	or	recall	the
said	order or	to modify	it.	He furt	her	submitted	that
the	allegations	made	in the	application		at	Exh.21

¶22

regarding the delay caused by the appellant in the hearing of the appeals were false.

¶23

6.		There is n	o doubt tha	t the appe	als have	been
pending	for	last	more	than	two	years	or	so	and	it
would	be	in	the	interest	of	both	the		parties	that

¶24

these appeals are heard and decided within a fixed period.

¶25

7.		Hence, it i	s direc	ted that Crimina	l Appeal
Nos.43,	44	and	45	of 2005	be heard	and		decided	on
their	own	merits	as	expeditiousl	y as	possibl	e	and	in
any	case	before	31	st October,	2007	and	the	imp	ugned
order	dated	11/4/	2007	shall	stand st	ayed	till	then	in

¶26

:4:

¶27

all the	appeals.		The parties	have	furnished	an
undertaking	before		this court	that	they	will
co-operate	with	the	learned Addl.	Sessions	Judge	to

¶28

get the appeals decided within the stipulated period

¶29

as mentioned hereinabove.

¶30

Petitions disposed off accordingly.

¶31

(B.H. Marlapalle,J.)

Shri.Changdev Rambhau Ghumare v. Shri.Vijay Rajaram Vidhate and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri.Changdev Rambhau Ghumare v. Shri.Vijay Rajaram Vidhate and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajaykumar Ramjeet Gautam Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Imtiyaz a. Shaikh Vs Anil Kakde and Anr.

Imtiyaz a. Shaikh Vs Anil Kakde and Anr.

Shantaram Gopal Sangare and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Damji Ramji Shah Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Jeetendra Anthony Fernandes Vs Hathway Cable and Datacom Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.