1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1026 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.398 OF 2008. Balraj S/o Budha Magar ... Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent. ... Mr.R.S.Shinde, advocate for the applicant. Mrs.R.D.Reddy, A.P.P. for the State. ... CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J. Date : 05.08.2009. PER COURT 1. This is an application seeking suspension of conviction. The applicant has been convicted for offence punishable U/s 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The learned Special Judge, Dhule, sentenced the applicant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two (2) years and to pay fine of 2 Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand), in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two (2) months. 2. The applicant was initially appointed as Junior Clerk on establishment of Zilla Parishad,Dhule, in the year 1965 and was promoted in due course of time w.e.f. 1.2.1974, as Senior Assistant. The applicant was charge-sheeted for offence of amassing disproportionate assets during his period of service as a public servant. The alleged charge indicated that he had amassed assets worth Rs.1,30,606-45 Ps. (Rupees one lac thirty thousand six hundred six and paise forty five). The applicant was in employment from 1965 till February 1974. The prosecution case was that his total income could be Rs.7,91,262/- (Rupees Seven lacs Ninety one thousand two hundred sixty two) and expenditure was estimated at Rs.3,01,897/- (Rupees three lacs one thousand eight hundred ninety seven). Though the probable saving of the applicant was estimated at Rs. 4,89,365/- (Rupees four lacs eighty nine thousand three hundred sixty five), yet, he was found in 3 possession of assets valued at Rs.6,19,971/- (Rupees six lacs nineteen thousand nine hundred seventy one). 3. The applicant is aged about 65 years. He urges to suspend the order of conviction on the ground that he is suffering from heart disease and requires medical expenditure as well as in need of attending his ailing wife. His contention is that the sanction order issued by the incharge C.E.O. is without application of mind. What transpires from the record is that sanction order was issued by P.W.2 Digambar Pawar, who took over charge of the post of C.E.O. as locumtenes, on 23.6.1997. The post was manned by Mr.Bobde. The Dy.S.P., A.C.B. had written Confidential letter to said Mr.Bobde, the Chief Executive Officer. On the very first day of taking over the charge, P.W. - Digambar Pawar, opened the Confidential letter addressed to Mr.Bobde and issued the sanction order. Therefore, there is scope to infer that there was no proper application of mind to the fact situation. Apart from all these aspects, 4 Mr.Shinde R.S., invited my attention to the fact that a similarly situated accused, namely, Sohanlal Bhavarilal Sevak, has been granted identical relief in Criminal Application No. 1401/2008 In Criminal Appeal No.141/2008, by the Coordinate Bench (Gavai,J.). In "Laxman Malhari Sable Vs. State of Maharashtra" 1997 Cri.L.J. 2556, a Division Bench of this Court held that order of conviction could be suspended when there was likelihood of causing damage which could not be undone even if he ultimately succeeds in the appeal. Herein, the appellant is old aged person and is suffering from serious ailment. If the appeal is not heard within a reasonable time frame, even if he will succeed in the appeal, perhaps he may not be able to reap the fruits of the order. Considering these aspects, the application is allowed. The order of conviction is suspended. (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) asp/office/Crapp102609