1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application [APPA] No. 389 of 2011 in Criminal Appeal No. 169 of 2011 (Anil S/o. Bhiku Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. K.S. Narwade, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S.M. Bhagde, A.P.P. for the State/respondent. CORAM : M. N. GILANI, J. DATE : 5 th AUGUST, 2011. Heard. This is an application filed under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence and release of the applicant on bail. The applicant had married Sushila in the year 2002. After about four months, the incident of Sushila consuming poison and resulting in her death occurred. Her father lodged F.I.R. alleging that at the time of marriage, some dowry was fixed. Part of the dowry i.e. cash amount of Rs.20,000/- and 3 Tolas gold had remained to be paid to the applicant. This was a reason for subjecting Sushila to cruelty. It was suspected that the applicant along with six other accused persons caused death of Sushila and, therefore, they were charged with the offence punishable 2 under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after appreciating the evidence, acquitted the applicant and all other accused persons of the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, however, he proceeded to convict the applicant of the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. For the offence punishable under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years. Except the applicant, the charges levelled against the accused nos. 2 to 7 could not be proved under any section. The following factors which are relevant to decide this application are thus : {i} The applicant was arrested on 14/09/2002 and thereafter was released on bail on 30/10/2002. {ii} Through out the trial and till the date of conviction, the applicant was on bail. {iii} During trial, he never jumped the bail. {iv} He attended the Court regularly. The learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the decision in case of Angana and another Vs. State of 3 Rajasthan reported in AIR 2009 SUPREME COURT 1669 and Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and others Vs. State of Gujarat reported in AIR 1999 SUPREME COURT 1859. The incident relates to the year 2002. The trial was completed on 22/03/2011. Through out the trial, i.e. for a period of more than 8 years, the applicant was on bail. Considering number of appeals pending before this Court, in routine course this appeal would not come up for final hearing in near future. In that light of the matter, execution of substantive sentence awarded to the applicant is suspended subject to his furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties in the like amount, with a condition that the applicant shall attend Police Station Pusad once in a month preferably on Monday or Tuesday of the first week of the month till disposal of this appeal. JUDGE *sdw