1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Revision Application No. 197/2010 And Criminal Application (APPR) No. 289 of 2010 [Bhimrao Mahadeo Sidam V. State of Maharashtra] ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Shri R. M. Patwardhan, Advocate for applicant. Shri N. R. Rode, APP for non applicant/State. CORAM : R.G. KETKAR, J. DATED : DECEMBER 01, 2010. Heard Shri Patwardhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rode, learned APP for respondent/State. Applicant has preferred this revision application under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 28.10.10 passed by the learned Extra Joint Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge Nagpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 180 of 2008 as also the judgment and order dated12.09.2008 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge in Sessions Trial No. 59 of 2008. By judgment and order dated 12.09.08, learned Assistant Sessions Judge convicted the applicant for offence punishable under Section 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R. I. for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in case of default of payment of fine, applicant to undergo 2 further R. I. for one month. Learned Judge also convicted the applicant for offence under Section 306 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R. I. for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- and in case of default to pay fine to undergo further R. I. for two months. Applicant along with others filed Criminal Appeal No. 180 of 2008. By judgment and order dated 28.10.10 Extra Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge maintained the conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Judge in so far as applicant is concerned and acquitted accused nos. 2 and 3. Against these orders the applicant has preferred this revision application. Admit. Shri Rode, learned APP waives service for respondent. Call record and proceedings. Criminal Application No. 289 of 2010: Applicant has filed this application for suspending sentence and releasing the applicant on bail during the pendency of the revision application. Heard Shri Patwardhan, learned counsel for applicant and Shri Rode, learned APP for non applicant/State. In para 4 of the application it is averred 3 that the applicant was on bail during the course of trial as also during the pendency of appeal. It is further averred that he has not misused the liberty in any manner. In para 6 of the application, it is averred that the fine imposed by the learned trial Court was deposited at the time of filing of the appeal. In these circumstances application is allowed. Applicant shall be released on same bail by furnishing fresh bail bonds. Hamdast permitted. JUDGE svk