[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.217 OF 2007 IN CRI.APPEAL NO.122 OF 2007 Shri.Deelip Sadashiv Mungikar ..Applicant Vs. State of Karnataka and Ors. ..Respondents ... Mr.Chetan Agarwal Advocate for Applicant Mr.D.P.Adsule, A.P.P. for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : FEBRUARY 23, 2007 DATE : FEBRUARY 23, 2007 DATE : FEBRUARY 23, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State of Maharashtra. 2. The applicant has been convicted under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471 read with Section 120-B of IPC and under sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 and sentenced to for two years. The applicant is now seeking bail. 3. Mr.Agarwal, the learned advocate appearing for the applicant states that the applicant was on bail [-2-] throughout the trial and he has not misused the liberty granted to him. This statement is not controverted by the prosecution. Mr. Agarwal further submitted that sentence imposed on the applicant is only two_ years and the appeal is not likely to be heard within that time. Hence, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. Looking to the evidence on record and the above position, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 5. The applicant to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs.Twenty Thousand only) with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. 6. Application is disposed of. [ V.K.Tahilramani, J.]