Allowed

Mangliprasad @ Vishal S/O Swamidin Aarakh and Another v. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Khaperkheda, Nagpur

Bombay HC21 Mar 2014APPA/142/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Appeal No.294 of 2013, the court granted an application seeking suspension of conviction for an appellant facing charges under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC. The court held that given the applicant's lack of income and responsibility for a young child, an exceptional case existed to protect her employment.

What did the court decide?

Order of conviction against the applicant was suspended until further orders of this Court.

Mangliprasad @ Vishal S/O Swamidin Aarakh and Another… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

1 appa142.14.odt

¶2

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

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION(APPA) NO.142 OF 2014 IN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.294 OF 2013

¶5

(MANGLIPRASAD @ VISHAL SWAMIDIN AARAKH & ANR...VS..STATE OF MAH. THR. PSO KHAPERKHEDA )

¶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

- - - - Mr. Rajnish Vyas, Advocate for Applicant No.2 Smt.Rajuliabai Aarakh Ms Kalyani Deshpande, A.P.P. for Respondent/ State.

¶10

CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI, J. DATED : MARCH 21, 2014.

¶11

Heard learned counsel Mr.Vyas appearing for present applicant Smt. Rajuliabai Aarakh and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶12

Applicant/appellant No.2 Rajuliabai Aarakh has been convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Her son Mangliprasad @ Vishal (appellant No.1) has also been convicted for the said offences. They have appealed against the said order. Their appeal has been admitted. The applicant had been granted bail and sentence imposed upon her by the trial Court is directed to remain suspended. This application is for suspension of conviction.

¶13

Learned counsel Mr. Vyas submitted that the applicant is poor lady and is working as General Mazdoor in Western Coalfields Limited (WCL). It is submitted that WCL is a Government of India Undertaking. If the applicant’s conviction is not stayed/suspended she may lose the job. It is further submitted that even if the applicant succeeds in the appeal it will be the discretion of the appointing authority to reinstate her with back wages or otherwise.

¶14

2 appa142.14.odt

¶15

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms Deshpande has submitted that even if the applicant is suspended she will be reinstated if she succeeds in the appeal and she will get back-wages at the time of reinstatement. As such she will not suffer any loss and no exceptional case is made out for suspending the conviction.

¶16

I have considered the arguments submitted by both the sides. One thing is very certain that the applicant has no other source of income. Both the appellants had allegedly subjected the deceased to cruelty and the deceased had committed suicide due to abetment on the part of the appellants. The child of the deceased and the appellant No.1, who is in custody, is at the mercy of the applicant. Age of the child is two years. As such, the child needs custody and care of the applicant. The applicant needs financial support to maintain herself and her grand-child. As the child grows the applicant will have to spend more on the child for education etc. Therefore, her job needs to be protected.

¶17

After having given thoughtful consideration to the facts of the case and the circumstances peculiar to the applicant, I am of the view that an exceptional case is made out for suspension of conviction under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence, I pass the following order.

¶18

The order of conviction passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No. 122 of 2012 against applicant Smt. Rijuliabai Swamidin Aarakh, who was original accused No.2, shall remain suspended until further orders of this Court.

¶19

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶20

JUDGE

¶21

RRaut..

Mangliprasad @ Vishal S/O Swamidin Aarakh and Another v. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Khaperkheda, Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangliprasad @ Vishal S/O Swamidin Aarakh and Another v. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Khaperkheda, Nagpur

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

Subhash Bhagwantrao Paraskar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Akola

Naresh S/O Tulsidas Gogyani (in Jail) Vs State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Bhandara

Nishad S/O Shalikraoji Mahadure Vs State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. P.S. Sevagram, Wardha

M/S. Sai Auto Agencies, Thr. Its Partner Dyandeo S/O Ramdas Rane Vs Kailash S/O Jago Kaikade and Another

Prabhakar S/O Jairam Maske Vs State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Lakhandur

Kailash S/O Rupchand Hatwar (in Jail) Vs State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Bhandara