The High Court dismissed a Criminal Writ Petition challenging the conditions imposed for suspending a sentence in a cheque-related case. The Court held the deposit condition was not arbitrary.
Writ Petition dismissed summarily.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
mpt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2619 of 2009
Chaitanya Prabhu Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Kolhapur,Through its Chairman Shri Ganpati Shankar Patil & Anr.
... Petitioners
versus
Shri Arun Vishnu Vadgaonkar & Anr ... Respondents ...
Mr.S.S.Tembekar for petitioners Mr.P.B. Rananavare for respondent no.1. Mr.S.N.Gawade APP for the State.
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J.
DATED : 21st November 2009
P.C.
compensation of Rs.4,15,000/- to the complainant and in default imposed a sentence of two months.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Sessions Judge acted arbitrarily in imposing a condition to deposit 50% of compensation as a condition for suspending the sentence.
Whether the High Court can interfere with the discretionary power of the appellate court under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Maheshwar Dattatraya Kale Vs. Captain Atul Wasudeo Divekar & AnrRelied on¶18
Maheshwar Dattatraya Kale Vs. Captain Atul Wasudeo Divekar & Anr, 2006 Cr.L.J. 606
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Chaitanya Prabhu Shikshan Prasarak Mandal & Anr.
Shri Arun Vishnu Vadgaonkar
D.G. Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
