:1: 15.apeal.1066.11 ata IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1066 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra ..Applicant Vs. Vijay S. Kamble and Ors ..Respondents Dr. F. R. Shaikh, APP for the State. CORAM :- V. M. KANADE & A. M. THIPSAY, JJ. DATE :- SEPTEMBER 13, 2011. P. C.: Heard the learned APP for State. 2 This is a Criminal Appeal filed against the judgment and order passed by the Adhoc Asst. Sessions Judge-2,Thane. The Appeal is filed for enhancement of sentence awarded by the Trial Court. By the said judgment and order dated 23.02.2011, the Sessions Court acquitted the Applicant of the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and in the application for leave to file appeal against the said order of acquittal, leave was refused by this Court. The Applicants, however, were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 306 :2: 15.apeal.1066.11 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I for three years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and, in default, to suffer further R. I for five months and they are also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R. I for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, and in default to suffer further R. I for two months. It is submitted that sentences imposed by the Trial Court are inadequate. It is submitted that the offence committed by the Respondents is a serious offence and maximum sentence ought to have been awarded. In our view, the submissions made by APP, cannot be accepted. The maximum sentence for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 is 10 years. The Trial Court has awarded three years of sentence and so far as Section 498 is concerned, the maximum sentence is three years and Trial Court has awarded two years. Whenever the section provides that sentence upto a particular period can be awarded by the Trial Court, a discretion vests in the Trial Court in imposing the sentence and unless it is shown that the said discretion is not properly exercised, this Court has been slow in interfering with the sentence, which is awarded by the Trial Court. The application for leave to file appeal which was filed by the State against the order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 304B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code was :3: 15.apeal.1066.11 refused and the appeal was not admitted. The sentence also in our view, is not inadequate. Hence the appeal is dismissed. ( A. M. THIPSAY, J ) ( V. M. KANADE, J.)