Allowed

Chotu @ Sushil Shalikram Mokalkar and Ors. v. the State of Mah. Thr. P.S.O.

Bombay HC22 Oct 2012APPA/795/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment granted bail to two applicants convicted under the Indian Penal Code pending their appeal against sentence. Their substantive sentences were suspended until the appeal concluded, and they must not leave the Akola district without police intimation.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail; substantive sentences suspended pending appeal; restriction on leaving Akola district without police intimation.

Chotu @ Sushil Shalikram Mokalkar and Ors. Vs the State… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

1 appa795.12.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION(APPA) NO.795 OF 2012 IN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 411 OF 2012.

¶5

(CHOTU @ SUSHIL S. MOKALKAR & 4 OTH..VS.. STATE OF MAH. THR. PSO PS. BORGAON (MANJU), DIST. AKOLA)

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

Court's or Judge's orders

¶9

¶10

CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI, J. DATED : OCTOBER 22, 2012.

¶11

Heard Mr.S.V.Sirpurkar, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr A.S.Fulzele, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent/ State.

¶12

The applicants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 148 and 325 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. They have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of rupees five hundred each for the former offence and rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of rupees one thousand each for the later offence.

¶13

The applicants were prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 302 read with Section 149 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. However, after conclusion of trial they were found not guilty of the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Instead of 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal code they have been found guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 325 and 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. As far as the offences punishable under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, they have been sentenced to

¶14

2 appa795.12.odt

¶15

suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of rupees five hundred each. All the substantive sentences i.e. one year, six years and one year, respectively, are directed to run concurrently.

¶16

It is submitted by learned counsel Mr. Sirpurkar that the applicants have a good case to argue, more particularly on the point of sentence. They have already undergone sentence of two years and four months.

¶17

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, however, opposes bail on the ground that the sentence is reasonable and there is no scope for arguments. Considering the fact that the applicants are found guilty of minor offences than the offences with which they were charged, it is likely that this Court may reduce sentence at the time of final hearing.

¶18

In view of this, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail during pendency of the appeal.

¶19

The applicants be released on bail in the sum of rupees twenty thousand each with one solvent surety each in the like amount or cash deposit of rupees twenty thousand each in lieu of the surety. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of Akola district without intimation in writing to Borgaon (Manju) Police Station of Akola District.

¶20

The substantive sentences, imposed on the applicants, shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal.

¶21

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

RRaut..

Chotu @ Sushil Shalikram Mokalkar and Ors. v. the State of Mah. Thr. P.S.O.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chotu @ Sushil Shalikram Mokalkar and Ors. v. the State of Mah. Thr. P.S.O.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Pandharinath Bhavsar Nominee of M/S Anand Mohta Agro Industries and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra at the Instance of Shri Jayant R Wane Food Inspector, Yavatmal

Gowardhan S/O Fagumal Lalwani and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra at the Instance of Shri Jayant Ramdas Wane and Others

Manoj S/O Ramdasji Dhale Vs Satish Balramji Shende

Santosh S/O Rushi Vairagade Vs the State of Maharashtra through Pso Virur Distt Chandrapur

Shreedevi Boddu Thimmaiah, Managing Director Sreee Devi Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Station House Officer Police Staion Sonegaon and Another

Vishveshwar S/O Raobaji Nikhare and One Vs Smt. Jankubai Wd/O Raobaji Nikhare and Another