1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2230 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 590 OF 1996 Vishram s/o Rupa Sonawane ...Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ..... Shri S.R.Barlinge, advocate for the applicant Shri S.D.Kaldate, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 23 rd June, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Shri Shri S.R.Barlinge, advocate for the applicant and Shri S.D.Kaldate, A.P.P. for respondent. 2 This is an application for fresh bail, preferred by the applicant (original accused) seeking bail during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 590 of 1996 challenging the judgment and order dated 30.9.1996, rendered in Sessions Case No. 45 of 1991 by the learned 5 th Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, convicting him under Section 324 of the Indian 2 Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs.250/- with default condition for non-payment of fine to suffer further S.I. for three months. 3 Indisputably, the appeal was admitted and the applicant was enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- with one surety in the like amount, by order dated 8.11.1996. 4 Learned counsel for the applicant canvassed that the applicant was on bail from 1996 to 2008. In the year 2008, since the applicant was not contactable to his advocate, non bailable warrant was issued against the applicant and the applicant was taken into custody, and therefore, said non bailable warrant was discharged. 5 It also appears from the proceedings that the learned counsel for the applicant sought number of adjournments to produce the copy of the judgment and order in S.C. No. 43 of 1999, but same has not been produced so far. It further appears from the proceedings that again non bailable warrant was issued against the appellant on 24.11.2009 and the appellant was taken into custody and was produced before this court on 7.6.2010 and he was sent to jail to undergo sentence in accordance with the judgment and order dated 30.9.1996 as afore stated. Thereafter the applicant has preferred the present application for fresh bail. 3 6 The applicant/appellant was on bail during trial and fine has been also deposited by him. 7 There is no dispute that the sentence awarded to the applicant/appellant is R.I. for one year i.e. short term sentence, and therefore, the applicant/appellant deserves to be enlarged on fresh bail. However, simultaneously the presence of the applicant/appellant is required to be ensured, and therefore, stringent conditions are required to be imposed upon the applicant while granting fresh bail to him. Besides that, the fact cannot be ignored that Criminal Appeal No. 590 of 1996 was part heard before earlier Bench, and hence, hearing of the appeal is required to be taken up on priority. 8 With the afore said observations, present application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on fresh bail in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to be furnished before the Trial Court, on the following conditions :- (I) The applicant/appellant shall not leave the area/jurisdiction of Taluka Yawal, District Jalgaon till the final hearing and disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 590 of 1996, without prior permission of this court. 4 (ii) The applicant/appellant shall report to Incharge of Yawal police station, Taluka Yawal, District Jalgaon, once in a week I.e. on every Monday between 5.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m., till final hearing and disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 590 of 1996. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap2230.10