1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 820/2010 ( State of Maharashtra .vs. Madhusudan Ramchandra Bansode and another. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. J.B. Jaiswal, APP for Applicant. .......... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 28, 2011 Heard. By the present application under Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of leave for preferring an appeal against the judgment and order 9.8.2010 passed by learned Special Judge-2, Akola in Special Case No. 3/2002 acquitting the respondents from commission of offence punishable under Section 7, 13 (1)(d) read with Section 13 (1)(ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Having regard to the submissions canvassed by the learned APP that though the first informant/complainant is dead and the panch PW1 Dnyaneshwar Dagwar was declared hostile, on certain aspects still considering the conduct of the complainant as established from the evidence of PW1 i.e. all of them had together been for tea and thereafter returned to 2 the room of appellant no.1, bribe amount was paid/accepted by appellant no.2 and he had reported the acceptance of an amount to appellant no.1 being not taken into consideration and/or ignored by the trial Court and so also the trial Court in spite of appellant no. 2 having received the bribe amount/marked currency notes had failed to take into consideration of presumption arising out of the provisions of Section 20 sub section (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and considering the legal position as explained in the decisions pointed out in the case of Tarsem Lal .vs. State of Haryana reported in AIR 1987 SC 806 and so also in Ram Krishan and another .vs. State of Delhi reported in AIR 1956 SC 476, the matter needs consideration. In view of the same, the prosecution has made out a case for granting leave for preferring an appeal against the judgment and order dated 9.8.2010. Leave granted. Application stands disposed of. Criminal Appeal No. ________/2011. Heard. Admit. Action under Section 390 of Cr.P.C. to follow. Inform the trial Court for releasing the respondents on bail subject to furnishing PR bond by each in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount and subject to the conditions that the respondents: (i) shall stay at the address mentioned in the appeal memo and/or if they are residing at some different address, they shall intimate the same to the 3 trial Court and shall not change the same without the permission of the Court, (ii) shall not leave the jurisdiction of this Court without the permission of this Court (iii) shall not commit any offence while being on bail granted vide this order and (iv) shall appear before this Court at the time of final hearing. JUDGE halwai