1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1970/2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.233/2011 Fulchand s/o Raghu Hattikar. Appellant (orig. accused.) V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra Respondent Shri S.P.Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for appellant. Shri V.G.Shelke APP for the respondent. CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 5 th MAY, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Issue notice to the respondent. Learned APP waives service of notice for respondent. 3. This is an application preferred by the applicant seeking bail pending hearing and final disposal of criminal appeal NO. 233/2011 suspending the substantive sentence inflicted upon him by way of judgment and order dated 26.4.2011 rendered by Special Judge, Osmanabad in Special Case (AC) No.17/2009, thereby 2 convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default to suffer S.I. For one month and also convicting him for the offence punishable under section 13 (1) (d) r.w. Section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and directing him to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- with default condition of non payment of fine to suffer S.I. for one month and also directing that aforesaid substantive sentences should run concurrently. 4. It appears that applicant/appellant has questioned the conviction and sentence imposed upon him by filing criminal appeal No.233/2011 before this Court and I have admitted the said appeal today only by passing order therein separately. Moreover, it is also apparent that there is no likelihood that said appeal would be taken up for final hearing in near future. 5. It is stated in the application that the applicant was on bail during the pendency of trial and it is also submitted that the applicant has not misused said liberty and even there is no 3 grievance of the respondent that applicant has misused said liberty. It is also submitted that the applicant has already deposited fine amount before the trial Court. Moreover, it is also apparent that substantive sentences inflicted upon the applicant are of short term sentences. 6. In the circumstances, considering the totality of facts, there is no impediment in enlarging the applicant on bail, pending hearing and final disposal of criminal appeal No.233/2011. 7. In the result, application is allowed and it is directed that applicant Fulchand s/o Raghu Hattikar be released on bail pending hearing and final disposal of Criminal Appeal No.233/2011, suspending the substantive sentences inflicted upon him by way of judgment and order dated 26.4.2011, on the same terms and conditions on which he was released on bail by the learned trial court, after conviction but on execution of fresh bond. Present application stands disposed of accordingly. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE ) JUDGE aaa/233.11 ***