1 crap2683.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2683 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 317 OF 2011 Shantabai Uttam Chavan ...Applicant (Orig.accused no.2) VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ..... Shri Joydeep Chatterjee, advocate for applicant/appellant Smt. Y.M.Kshirsagar, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 30 th June, 2011 PER COURT : 1 Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2 This is an application, preferred by the applicant/appellant (original accused no.2), challenging the conviction and sentences inflicted upon her by way of judgment and order, dated 22.6.2011, rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, in Sessions Case No. 127 of 2009, 2 crap2683.11 thereby convicting her for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing her to undergo R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine further to undergo R.I. for three months; and also convicting her for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing her to undergo R.I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine further to undergo R.I. for one year; and further directing that both the substantive sentences to run concurrently and that she will be entitled to set off,if any, as per the provisions of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3 The applicant has questioned the conviction and sentences imposed upon her by filing Criminal Appeal No. 317 of 2011 before this court and I have admitted the said appeal today only by passing the order separately therein, and there is no likelihood of taking up the said appeal for final hearing in near future. 4 It also appears that the substantive sentences inflicted upon her is for five years, which is a short term sentence, relying upon the judicial pronouncement in the case of Kiram Kumar vs State ov M.P., reported at 2001 AIR SCW 5130. Moreover, it is submitted that the applicant was released on bail by this court on 5.5.2009 as per order passed in Criminal Application No. 1222 of 2009 and the respondent has no grievance that the applicant has misused the said liberty. It is also reported that the applicant has already deposited fine amount of Rs. 3 crap2683.11 2,500/- in the trial Court on 22.6.2011 itself. So also, the applicant is a woman and reportedly she is of 58 years age. 5 Hence, considering all the facts, there is no impediment in enlarging the applicant on bail during the pendency of appeal. 6 In the result, present application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on same bail, but on execution of fresh bond, suspending the substantive sentences, pending hearing and final disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 317 of 2011, with direction that she shall report before the Trial Court once in a quarter till disposal of said appeal and present application stands disposed of accordingly. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap2683.11