Allowed

Rajanna S/O. Parvatalu Anmula and Another v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Police Station Sironcha Dist. Gadchiroli

Bombay HC11 Apr 2018APPA/196/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-paragraph order granting suspension of life sentence and bail for applicants convicted under Section 307 IPC tribunal proceedings. Court found prima facie trial court erred in conviction without considering victim’s evidence properly while applicant was on bail.

What did the court decide?

Execution of sentence suspended; applicants released on bail under same terms as during trial.

Rajanna S/O. Parvatalu Anmula and Another Vs State of… — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

APEAL129-18

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.196/2018 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 129/2018

¶5

(RAJANNA PARVATALU ANMULA & ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. PSO SUB-PS SIRONCHA, GADCHIROLI)

¶6

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

¶7

- - - - Shri A.C. Jaltare, counsel for the applicants-appellants. Shri A.M. Joshi, A.P.P. for the non-applicant/respondent.

¶8

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ. DATE : APRIL 11, 2018.

¶9

Heard.

¶10

By this application, the applicants seek the suspension of sentence under the provisions of Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶11

We have perused the judgment of the trial Court and have also perused the evidence tendered by the prosecution witnesses. Some other documents are also perused. The applicants have been sentenced to suffer life imprisonment in view of the offence punishable under the provisions of Section 307 of the Penal Code. On a reading of the evidence of PW1-Victim, it appears that he had suffered only one axe blow and he has deposed in his examination-in-chief that the said blow was inflicted by Guraiyya who has expired at the time of incident, on the spot. On a perusal of the evidence, it prima-facie appears that the trial Court has not considered this aspect of the matter in the right perspective before convicting the applicants for the offence punishable under section 307 of the Penal Code. It further appears that the applicants were on bail during the pendency of the trial. In the circumstances of the case, the prayer made in the application needs to be granted.

¶12

APEAL129-18

¶13

¶14

Hence, the prayer made in the application is granted and the execution of the sentence is suspended. The applicants may be released on bail on the same terms and conditions on which they were released during the pendency of the trial.

¶15

The criminal application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶16

JUDGE JUDGE

¶17

APTE

Rajanna S/O. Parvatalu Anmula and Another v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Police Station Sironcha Dist. Gadchiroli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajanna S/O. Parvatalu Anmula and Another v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Police Station Sironcha Dist. Gadchiroli

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

Murli Baburao Ambore Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Superintendent of Police Akola and Others

Ankush S/O. Ramchandra Satpute (in Jail) Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. the Deputy Inspector General of Prison Eastern Region Nagpur and Another

Shri. Manmohan S/O Shrikrishna Patel Vs Maharashtra Industrial Development Corp., Regional Office, Nagpur Thr. Area Manager and Another

Shri. Raju Dharma Rathod Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Officer Police Station Parva Dist. Yavatmal and Anothe

Shri. Sitaram S/O. Ramesh Lande and Another Vs State of Maharashtra

Shri. Raju Dharma Rathod Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Officer Police Station Parva Dist. Yavatmal and Anothe