vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.855 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.855 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.855 OF 2008 Salvi Builders & Developers & Anr. ... Petitioners V/s. Shrikant Sudam Sonawale & Anr. ... Respondents Mr.Samir A. Vaidya for Petitioners Mr.D.P. Adsule, APP, for Respondent-State CORAM: SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. DATED: MAY 6, 2008 MAY 6, 2008 MAY 6, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Leave to amend the petition to annex the order dated 9.4.2008 and amend prayer clauses. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 2. The main contention of the Petitioners is that the order of the Sessions Judge suspending the sentence imposed on Petitioner No.2 while admitting his appeal has been passed subject to the condition of depositing 50% of the amount of compensation. The learned advocate submits that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Dilip Dahanukar v/s. Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd. & Anr., 2007 SCCL.COM 418 2007 SCCL.COM 418 2007 SCCL.COM 418, the order of the Sessions Court is unsustainable as the condition for suspending the sentence on depositing the amount of Rs.45,000/- is onerous and would amount to defeating the statutory right of an appeal available to the : 2 : petitioners. 3. In my opinion, in the circumstances of the case, it would be appropriate to direct the petitioners to deposit an amount of Rs.20,000/- before the Sessions Court by 31.5.2008. It appears that by an order of 9.4.2008, the Sessions Court had already revoked the order suspending the sentence. 4. Since I have directed the amount of Rs.20,000/- to be deposited as a condition for suspending the sentence, the order dated 9.4.2008 is set aside. The order dated 18.3.2008 is modified to the extent that instead of depositing Rs.51000/- on or before 1.4.2008, the Petitioners are directed to deposit Rs.20,000/- on or before 31.5.2008. 5. Petition stands disposed of.