1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No.3570 of 2008 In Criminal Appeal No.693 of 2008 (Mohan s/o Chintaman Kumbhare v. State of Maharashtra) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Shri R.K. Tiwari, Advocate for Applicant. Shri Sathianathan, Special Public Prosecutor for Non-Applicant. CORAM : R.C. Chavan, J. DATE : 3rd December, 2008 The applicant, who has been convicted for offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(ii) and 3(4) of the M.C.O.C. Act and sentenced to suffer RI for seven years and fine of Rs.5 lacs on each counts or in default to suffer further RI for two years on each counts, seeks suspension of his sentence during the pendency of his appeal, which has been admitted. The applicant had been arrested on 20-8-2001 and was in jail till 30-6-2006. After the judgment by the Special Court on 8-5-2008, the applicant had been taken taken into custody and till this date he is in jail. Thus the applicant has been in custody for about 5 ½ years. Relying on the judgment of this Court in Hamid @ Bhurya Yakubkhan Pathan v. State of Maharashtra, the learned 2 counsel for the applicant submits that since the applicant has suffered major part of substantive sentence, the remaining part of the sentence may be suspended on applicant's depositing half of the fine imposed upon him. The learned Special Public Prosecutor has vehemently and very strongly opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant. However, considering the fact that applicant has been acquitted of the substantive offence for which he was charged along with others at the trial and the fact that the applicant has suffered imprisonment for almost 5 ½ years and that the appeal would take a long time for disposal, the remaining part of the substantive sentence imposed upon the applicant is suspended on his furnishing a PR bond of Rs.1 lac with one or more solvent sureties in the aggregate sum of Rs.1 lac and on his depositing 50% of the total fine imposed upon him, i.e. Rs.5 lacs. If the applicant has already deposited some amount of fine, necessary adjustment may be done. Application stands disposed of. Hamdast allowed. JUDGE pdl