Allowed

Harishchandra Datta Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC15 Apr 2013APPA/312/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal application, the applicant, convicted for an offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC, sought suspension of sentence and bail pending appeal. The bench considered the short duration of the sentence, time served, and prospects of appeal, allowing the application by granting bail and suspending the substantive sentence.

What did the court decide?

The substantive sentence of imprisonment was suspended and the applicant was enlarged on bail on PR bond of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in like amount and directed to report to Karjat police

Harishchandra Datta Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2013)

APPA312.13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.312 OF 2013

¶7

¶8

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.644 OF 2010

¶9

Harischandra Datta Patil )....Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra )....Respondent

¶10

Mr.K.S.Patil for the applicant. Mrs.V.R.Bhosale APP for State.

¶11

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

¶12

DATE : 15 th April, 2013.

¶13

PC :-

¶14

1 By this application the applicant seeks suspension of the sentence of imprisonment and the enlargement on bail pending the decision of this appeal. It appears that the applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with section 34 of IPC and sentenced to suffer RI for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for three months, by the Addl.Sessions Judge, Alibag, Dist-Raigad dated 3.8.2010. The applicant had earlier filed an application seeking similar relief before the learned single Judge of this Court by filing Criminal Application No.1099 of 2010. The aforesaid application came to be withdrawn by the applicant with liberty to file an

¶15

APPA312.13

¶16

¶17

application afresh. Subsequently, the applicant had filed another application that is Criminal Application No.1264 of 2010 before the Division Bench on 29.4.2011. Since none had appeared on behalf of the applicant, application was dismissed for want of prosecution by a bench of which one of us P.V.Hardas,J was a member. The aforesaid order was passed on 29.4.2011. Subsequent thereto the present application has been filed.

¶18

2 Since the applicant has been convicted for a short term sentence of 7 years and there is no likelihood of the appeal being decided within a period of one or two years from today, and since the applicant had already undergone imprisonment of more than 2 & ½ years, we are inclined to allow this application.

¶19

3 Accordingly, we allow this application and suspend the substantive sentence of imprisonment and direct that the applicant be enlarged on bail on the PR bond of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. In addition, the applicant shall attend Karjat police station once in 3 months on 1^st or 15^th of the month between 8.00 a.m to 9.00 a.m. Application allowed accordingly.

¶20

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

¶21

3 APPA312.13

Harishchandra Datta Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harishchandra Datta Patil 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prijesh Arunkumar Kurari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Daniel Christopher Bauer Vs the State of Maharashtra

Harilal Mevalal Gupta Vs the State of Maharashtra