Allowed

Balaji Vilas Shinde v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC11 Aug 2017APPA/590/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal against sentences for IPC and POCSO offences. Court allowed application to suspend execution of substantive sentence pending appeal disposal and released appellant on bail with conditions including non-interference with victim.

What did the court decide?

Execution of substantive sentences in Special (Child) Sessions Case No.262 of 2015 is suspended till disposal of appeal; appellant released on bail.

Balaji Vilas Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

Megha 5_appa_590_2017.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.590 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.353 OF 2017

¶4

Balaji Vilas Shinde ...Appellant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶5

Mr. Nilesh Kadam for the Appellant Mr. Prashant Jadhav, APP for the Respondent.

¶6

CORAM :SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

¶7

DATED: 11^th AUGUST, 2017.

¶8

P.C.:-

¶9

The Applicant herein, who is an accused in Special (Child)

¶10

Sessions Case No.262 of 2015 has prayed for suspension of execution of substantive sentence pending disposal of the Appeal.

¶11

The Applicant has been held guilty of offences punishable under sections 451 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 7 r/w. 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short, 'the POCSO' Act). The Applicant has been sentenced to undergo maximum imprisonment of three years for offences punishable under Section 354 of the IPC and Section 8 of the

¶12

Megha

¶13

1/3

¶14

Megha 5_appa_590_2017.doc

¶15

POCSO Act. In addition, the Applicant is sentenced to suffer imprisonment of two years for offence punishable under section 451 of the IPC and to pay total fine amount of Rs.8,000/- in respect of all these three offences. The substantive sentences awarded are to run concurrently.

¶16

The learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has already deposited the fine amount before the Special Court (POCSO), Pune. As stated earlier, the Applicant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a maximum period of three years. The Appeal is of the year 2017. Considering the large pendency of the cases, the Appeal is not likely to come up for final hearing in the next couple of years. Hence, rejection of prayer to suspend the execution of substantive sentences will result the Applicant undergoing the imprisonment even before his Appeal is decided on merits. The Applicant was on bail during trial. There are no allegations of the accused having violated the terms and conditions of the bail. Considering the above facts and circumstances, following order is passed :-

¶17

ORDER

¶18

(i) The Application is allowed.

¶19

Megha

¶20

2/3

¶21

Megha 5_appa_590_2017.doc

¶22

(ii) The execution of substantive sentences in Special (Child) Sessions Case No.262 of 2015 is suspended till the disposal of the appeal on merits. The Applicant is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with one or two sureties to the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Judge and District Judge-1, Pune.

¶23

(iii) The Applicant shall furnish his permanent as well as local address, if any, and shall intimate change of address, if any, to the Investigating Officer, as well as to the concerned Court.

¶24

(iv) The Applicant shall not interfere with the victim in

¶25

any manner.

¶26

(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

¶27

Megha

¶28

3/3

Balaji Vilas Shinde v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balaji Vilas Shinde 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prasad Balasaheb Sakore Vs the State of Maharashtra

Madhukar Bhagwan Padwal and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Imtiyaz Ahmed Saeed Ahmed Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dinesh Harji Malkari Vs the Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli

Dattatray Tukaram Jagdale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kantaben Ramji Kharvi Vs the State of Maharashtra