Allowed

Babu Ramappa Kamble v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Apr 2013APPA/1468/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Criminal Application, the Bombay High Court allowed a stay of conviction against an applicant convicted under the Bombay Prohibition Act, who had completed his sentence. The stay was granted to enable the applicant to avail certain service benefits, relying on the principle laid down in Navjot Singh Sidhu.

What did the court decide?

Stay of conviction for the extent of service benefits.

Babu Ramappa Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2013)

APPA 1468.12.sxw

JPP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1468 OF 2012 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 559 OF 2012

Babu Ramappa Kamble.

... Applicant.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra.

¶10

... Respondent.

¶11

Mr. A.A. Siddiqui for the Applicant. Mr. H.J. Dedhia, APP for the State.

¶12

CORAM : P.V. HARDAS & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

¶13

APRIL 25, 2013.

¶14

P.C. :-

¶15

This is an application at the behest of the Applicant/Appellant who has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 65(E) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. The Applicant/Appellant also stands convicted for an offence punishable under Section 65(F) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and is sentenced to the term of imprisonment for two years on each count with the directions that the substantive sentence shall run concurrently and the Applicant/Appellant, according to the learned Counsel for the Applicant, has undergone the entire substantive sentence imposed by the Court.

¶16

APPA 1468.12.sxw

¶17

¶18

The Applicant has prayed that the conviction against the Applicant be stayed so that the Applicant who has undergone the substantive sentence of imprisonment would be entitled to some service benefits. The learned Counsel for the Applicant has placed reliance on the Judgment of the Supreme Court in Navjot Singh Sidhu v/s. State of Punjab & Anr. (2007) 2 SCC 574 . The learned APP has opposed the aforesaid submission of the Applicant on the ground that the Applicant has been convicted for a serious offence.

¶19

Undisputedly, the Applicant has undergone the sentence of imprisonment which has been passed by the Trial Court against the Applicant. It appears that pursuant to the conviction of the Applicant, the service of the Applicant has also been terminated. Since the Applicant has undergone the entire sentence of imprisonment, we are inclined, in the peculiar facts of the present case, to stay the conviction of the Applicant.

¶20

Accordingly, this Application is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶21

(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.)

Babu Ramappa Kamble v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Ramappa Kamble v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Pukhraj Jain Vs Mohammad Iliyas Ahmed Shaikh @ Papa and Ors.

Shaitansingh Sohansingh Rajput Vs the State of Maharashtra

Napoleon Sebastian Gernandez and Anr. Vs Kiran Devappa Pujari and Anr.

The Associated Cement Staff Union Vs Senior Inspector of Police, Azad Maidan Police Station and Ors.

M/S. Lux Industries Limited Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Badshah Singh Ajab Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra