1 criap-526.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 526 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 52 OF 2011 Ashok Sambhaji Patil & anr. Applicants-appellants vs The State of Maharashtra Respondent. ----- Shri P.D.Patil , Advocate, holding for Shri A. B. Girase, Advocate, for applicants. Shri V.G. Shelke, APP for the Respondent. Coram : Shrihari P. Davare, J. Date : 28th April, 2011. P. C. 01. This is an application preferred by the applicants- (original accused Nos. 2 and 3) seeking bail during pendency of hearing and final disposal of Criminal Appeal No.52 of 2011, suspending the substantive sentences inflicted upon them. 02. It appears that the applicants herein, by judgment and order dated 31.1.2011 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nandurbar, in Sessions Case No. 6 of 2002, were 2 criap-526.11 convicted for the offence punishable under Section 323 r/w Section 34 of IPC, for causing simple hurt to Tryabak and were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, each, and in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for ten days, and they were also convicted for offence punishable under Section 324 read with Section 34 of IPC, for causing hurt to Pramila Marathe, and applicant no.1 herein, namely, Ashok is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/=, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for forty days, whereas applicant No. 2 Bharat is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.250/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for five days, and they were also convicted for offence punishable under Section 324 r/w Section 34 of IPC, for causing simple injuries by deadly weapons to Kamalbai Tryambak Marathe, and applicant No.1 herein, namely, Ashok is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for ten days, whereas applicant No.2 3 criap-526.11 Bharat is sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for two months and twenty three days [period already under gone in jail] and to pay fine of Rs.250/=, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five days, as well as under Section 324 r/w Section 34 of IPC, for causing simple injuries by deadly weapon to Jyotibai Santosh Marathe, and applicant No.1 herein, namely, Ashok is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/=, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for ten days, and applicant No. 2, namely, Bharat is sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for two months and 23 days [already undergone in jail] and to pay a fine of Rs.250/=, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five days. It was directed that substantive sentences of present applicant No.2 Bharat shall run concurrently, whereas substantive sentence of applicant No.1 Ashok under Section 323 r/w Section 34 of IPC for assaulting Tryambak Marathe was to run concurrently with his sentence under Section 324 r/w Section 34 of IPC, but his substantive sentence for offence under Section 324 r/w Section 34 of IPC for assaulting Kamalbai, Pramilabai and Jyotibai shall run 4 criap-526.11 consecutively, and it was further directed that out of the fine amount, if recovered, a sum of Rs.3000/= be paid to PW-12 Pramilabai Tryambak Marathe [Mrs. Dipali Santosh Marathe]. 03. It appears that the applicants-appellants have questioned the convictions and sentences inflicted upon them, by filing criminal appeal No.52 of 2011 before this Court, which has been admitted on 14.2.2011 and same is pending and there is no likelihood that the said appeal would be taken up for hearing in near future. 04. Moreover, it also appears that the trial court had granted protection to the present applicants after conviction on 31.1.2011, and considering the said aspect, this court extended the said protection granted by the trial court, by order dated 3.2.2011 till 14.2.2011, and thereafter also, said protection was extended from time to time, which is effective till today. 5 criap-526.11 05. It further appears that substantive sentences inflicted upon the applicants-appellants herein are for fixed period and are of short term nature, considering the ratio laid down in Kiran Kumar vs. State of M.P. 2001 AIR SCW 5130. It is also evident from the copy of the impugned judgment that the applicants herein have deposited the fine amount before the trial court itself. Further, it is canvassed by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants were on bail during trial and they did not misuse the said liberty, nor there is any grievance by the respondent in that respect. 06. Having comprehensive view of the matter, there is no impediment in confirming the interim protection and allowing the application, and releasing the applicants-accused on bail, pending hearing and final disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2011, on the same terms and conditions on which bail was granted by the trial court, but on execution of fresh bonds. 07. Hence, present application is allowed, and the interim protection granted by this court earlier, stands confirmed and 6 criap-526.11 extended till final hearing and disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2011, and it is directed that the applicants herein be released on bail, pending hearing and final disposal of Criminal Appeal No.52 of 2011, suspending the substantive sentences inflicted upon them by the impugned judgment and order dated 31.1.2011, on the same terms and conditions on which they were released by the trial court after conviction, but on execution of fresh bonds and on condition that they shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, directly or indirectly in whatsoever manner. 08. Present Application stands disposed of, accordingly. pnd/criap-526.11 (Shrihari P. Davare, J.)