IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2258/2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 337/2009 [Abhimanyu D. Barai vs. State of Maharashtra] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -------------------------------------------------------------- - -- CORAM : S.R.DONGAONKAR, J. DATE : 6 th July, 2009 Heard Shri R.P.Joshi, Advocate, for the applicant/appellant and Shri Mandpe, APP, for respondent State. The appellant/applicant has been convicted by the trial Court for the offence under Section 338 and 304 Part-II of the I.P.C. The allegations against the applicant/appellant are perused, for which he has been convicted. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant that the identification of the accused by the witnesses is not proved beyond doubt. According to him, there was no identification parade. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the facts are such that the identification of the applicant as the driver of the offending truck is doubtful. It does appear that after the incident of breach of direction by the police officials to stop the truck, the truck was speedy and it had halted at some distance. The driver and cleaner of the said truck tried to run away. They were not caught on the spot and on the next day, one driver was arrested from one Himmat Transport. In these circumstances, there was necessity of identification parade. However, all these aspects need to be considered at the time of final hearing of the appeal. It is clear that the applicant was on bail during the trial and there are no allegations of his abusing the bail. He had attended the trial regularly. The sentence is of fixed term. He states that he has deposited the fine. In these circumstances, order of suspension of sentence is warranted. On applicant’s furnishing bail of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of that amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, he be released on bail. He is directed to keep his residential address known to the P.S.O. Gittikhadan till the appeal is disposed of, so also make his residential address known to the Police Station under whose jurisdiction his residence is there, under intimation to the office of this Court.. On furnishing such bail, as the fine amount has been deposited, his substantive sentence shall stand suspended. Application stands disposed of. Hamdast granted. JUDGE Rvjalit