IN REVN/361/2023 v. The State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 07 Dec 2023
- Bench
- S G CHAPALGAONKAR
Outcome
Allowed
The Criminal Application is allowed
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 452, 504, 506
- Arms Act, 1959 s. 25
- Bombay Police Act, 1951 s. 135
- Probation of Offenders Act
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Having considered submissions advanced and after going through the reasoning adopted by the Courts below, it appears that there are arguable grounds which require consideration in this Revision Application. Similarly, there is no whisper regarding consideration of benefit under the provisions of Probation of…
Judgment
Mr. N. S. Shah, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. A. S. Shinde, APP for Respondents-State. … CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. DATED : 07th DECEMBER, 2023. PER COURT:-
Mr. Shah, learned Advocate appearing for the applicant submits that the applicants were subjected to prosecution in Regular Criminal Case No.161/2013 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Jalna for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 324, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 186o, Section 4 r/w Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. On conclusion of the trial, the applicants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 452 r/w 34 (2) 939-appln-4385-2023.odt of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for three months with fine. The judgment of the Trial Court was subjected to challenge in Appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge at Jalna. The Appeal came to be partly allowed, thereby setting aside conviction of applicant no.2 for offences punishable under Section 4 r/w 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. However, conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 452 and 506(ii) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code has been maintained. He would submit that the Courts below have failed to appreciate the evidence on record in its proper perspective, so also defences raised on behalf of the applicant/accused persons is ignored. By inviting attention of this Court to the grounds raised in Revision Application, he submits that matter requires consideration after calling Record and Proceedings.
The learned APP however strongly opposes the prayer for grant of bail. He would submit that both the Courts have concurrently held the applicants guilty for the offences stated above.
Operative part
Having considered submissions advanced and after going through the reasoning adopted by the Courts below, it appears that there are arguable grounds which require consideration in this Revision Application. Similarly, there is no whisper regarding consideration of benefit under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act. In that view of the matter, case is made out for grant of interim bail till further orders. Hence, the following order:
(i) The Criminal Application is allowed. ORDER (3) 939-appln-4385-2023.odt (ii) Pending hearing and final disposal of the Revision Application, the substantive sentence imposed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Jalna in Regular Criminal Case No.161/2013 dated 30.12.2019 and confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Jalna in Criminal Appeal No.07/2020 dated 30.11.2023 is hereby suspended till further orders.
(iii) Meanwhile, the applicants, Fayaz s/o Jilani Bagwan, Ayyaz s/o Jilani Bagwan and Riyaz s/o Jilani Bagwan be released on bail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety of the like amount.
(iv) Bail before the Trial Court.
(v) The Criminal Application is disposed of. (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE Devendra/December-2023
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The Criminal Application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 452, 504, 506; Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25; Bombay Police Act, 1951 — s. 135; Probation of Offenders Act.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 07 Dec 2023. The bench was S G CHAPALGAONKAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.