5b. cr appa 1276­10.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1276 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 780 OF 2010 Bhausahab Devappa Latthe & Anr .. Applicants Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. B.R. Patil i/b Mr. Majon Kadam for the Applicants Ms. M.M. Deshmukh, APP for the State CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 25th OCTOBER, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard learned advocate for the applicants-original accused nos. 1 and 2 and learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant no. 1 i.e original accused nos. 1 has been convicted under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d)(i) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. So also, applicant no. 2 i.e original accused no. 2 has been convicted under Sections 7, 12 and 13(1)(d)(i) of Prevention of Corruption Act. The appeal preferred by them against the said order has been admitted. Now, the applicants are seeking bail. 3. Learned advocate for the applicants stated that besides this case, the applicants have a clean record. He further 1 5b. cr appa 1276­10.doc stated that the applicants were on bail during the trial and they have not misused the liberty granted to them. Both these statements have not been controverted by learned APP. Moreover, it is seen that the sentence is only for one year and the appeal is not likely to come up for hearing in the near future. Thus, looking to the above facts, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Hence, the order: O R D E R 1. Applicants- Bhausahab Devappa Latthe and Shankar Pandurang Patil be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- [Rs. Fifteen Thousand Only ] each with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. 2. Application is allowed in above terms. [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 2 5b. cr appa 1276­10.doc 3