1 ndm 17 revn.624.09 anr IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 624 OF 2009 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 622 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 624 OF 2009 Bhimrao Ramchanda Kanase and ors. ... APPLICANTS Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ... RESPONDENT -------- Mr. Vijay Killedar for Applicants. Mr. P.S. Hingorani, APP for State. -------- CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 23 rd March, 2010. P.C. 1 By consent, the Revision Application is taken up for final hearing. 2 The Applicants challenge the concurrent orders passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Islampur in Regular Criminal 2 Case No. 136 of 1994 dated 30 th June, 1997 thereby convicting the Applicants for the offence punishable under Sections 324 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months and pay fine of Rs.500/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month and further convicting for the offence punishable under Sections 452 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing to suffer rigorous imprisonment of two months and the order passed by the learned Ad-hoc Additional Session Judge, Islampur dated 24 th August, 2009 thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the present Applicants. 3 It is the prosecution case that on 09 th March, 1994, the complainant had removed the sand laid by the accused persons. It is the case of the prosecution that thereafter, when the Complainant went to his house, the Accused persons armed with weapons came to the house of the Complainant and started abusing him and his family members. It is the prosecution case that thereafter, the Accused persons assaulted the Complainant and his family members. On the basis of this charge, the Applicants were tried for the offence punishable under Section 452, 324, 326 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. At the conclusion of the trial, the accused were convicted as aforestated. An appeal preferred their against is also dismissed. 4 After considering the contentions of the learned counsel for 3 the parties and going through the judgment of the learned trial court so also the Appellate Court, I find that both the Courts have appreciated the the evidence in the correct perspective and as such no interference is warranted insofar as the order of conviction is concerned. 5 However, it is to be noted that the incident occurred on account of previous enmity between the parties, about which a civil dispute was already pending. It has come on record that the Applicants did not have any criminal antecedents. The Applicants have been on bail throughout the trial and appeal period. The incident has occurred in 1994 and sixteen long years have been lapsed therefrom. I find that it would not be in the interest of justice to direct the Applicants to suffer the sentence in the peculiar facts of the case. Even the learned trial Court by taking the limited view has awarded sentence only for two months. I therefore find that this is the fit case wherein this court by exercising the powers under Section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code, instead of directing the accused to suffer the sentence immediately, direct them to be released on executing bond to keep peace and good behaviour. 6 The Revision is therefore, partly allowed. While maintaining the order of conviction, it is directed that instead of sentencing the accused to suffer the sentence, the accused / Applicants are directed to be released on their executing bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each with solvent surety in the like amount, to be executed before the learned trial 4 Court to the effect that the Applicants shall appear and receive sentence when called upon during the period of two years and in the meantime, to keep peace and good behaviour. The said bond shall be executed within a period of four weeks from today. It is made clear that in the event, the Applicants do not breach the conditions in the bond, the orders of sentence shall stand set aside. It is further made clear that in the event, if the conditions in the bond are breached, the Applicants would be liable to undergo sentence as per the impugned order. [ B.R. GAVAI, J ]