Dismissed

Manoj Budha Chavan v. the State of Mahrashtra

Bombay HC25 Aug 2010APPLN/2377/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court at Aurangabad dismissed a criminal application seeking suspension of an applicant's life imprisonment sentence pending the disposal of a concurrent criminal appeal. The court held that no case was made out for bail, particularly as the prosecution had proven the offence beyond reasonable doubt based on dying declaration Exh.55.

What did the court decide?

The application for suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment is dismissed.

Manoj Budha Chavan Vs the State of Mahrashtra — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2377 OF 2010 IN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.252 OF 2010

¶5

Manoj S/o.Budha Chavan, Age-27 years, Occu-Labour, R/o.Nandurga Tanda, Tq. Ausa, Dist. Latur

¶6

APPLICANT

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT

¶9

Mrs.S.S.Jadhav, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned A.P.P.for State.

¶10

(CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND

¶11

A.V.POTDAR, J.J.)

¶12

DATE : 25/08/2010

¶13

PER COURT :

¶14

By this application, the applicant/appellant seeks suspension of the substantive sentence of the imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending the decision of this appeal. The applicant stands convicted for an offence punishable u/s. 302 r/w. 34 of The I.P.C, and is sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- with the default condition of undergoing further rigorous imprisonment for 2 months in the event of non payment of fine, by the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge-2, Latur, by judgment dated

¶15

¶16

17/04/2010.

¶17

The conviction of the applicant is based upon the two dying declarations at Exh.65 and Exh.55 recorded by P.W.No.13 and P.W.No.11 respectively. The Trial Court accepted the aforesaid dying declarations and came to the conclusion that the prosecution had established the offence against the applicant beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly convicted and sentenced the applicant.

¶18

Mrs.S.S.Jadhav, learned counsel for the applicant has urged before us that the dying declaration at Exh.65 can not be relied upon as P.W.No.13 has not proved the contents of the dying declaration. It is, therefore, urged before us that the applicant has been successful in making out the case for suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending the decision of the appeal. The learned A.P.P. has pointed out to us that even if Exh.65 is left out of consideration, prosecution has proved the contents as well as the offence against the applicant accused beyond reasonable doubt by virtue of the dying declaration at Exh.55 recorded by P.W.No.11. We have perused the evidence of P.W.No.11 and prima-facie we are satisfied that P.W.No.11 has proved the contents of the dying declaration.

¶19

In the light of the aforesaid evidence, according to us, no case for suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment is made out by the applicant and the application deserves to be dismissed.

¶20

¶21

Since the applicant is in custody and has been in custody right from the date of his arrest, we expedite the hearing of the appeal. Application dismissed.

¶22

(A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.)

¶23

khs/AUGUST 2010/cri.appl.2377-10

Manoj Budha Chavan v. the State of Mahrashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Budha Chavan v. the State of Mahrashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sk. Sayeeda W/O Sk. Yousuf Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Sow Mubinabee Khaja Moinoddin Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Jaykumar Bhimrao Kadam Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kavita Gautam Kokre Vs State of Mah

The State of Mah Vs Rajendra Prabhakar Bagul and Anr.

Sitaram Tukaram Masulkar Vs the State of Mah