ANILBHAI BAIJNATH BAJPAYEE Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Shri K.P. Raval, learned APP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no. 1-State in each of the applications and Shri Rajesh Kanani, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no. 2-original complainant in each of the applications.

(2.) IN the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, all these applications are taken up for final hearing today.

(3.) BEING aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgement and order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Negotiable Instruments Act, Court No. 4, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No. 3082/2008, 3083/2008, 3084/2008, 7239/2008, 7240/2008, 7241/2008 and 7242/2008 convicting the respective applicants-original accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the respective applicants-original accused preferred Criminal Appeal Nos. 88/2010 to 94/2010 before the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Ahmedabad. In respective appeals, respective applicants-original accused submitted an application below Exh. 4 under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for bail/suspension of sentence imposed by the learned trial Court and the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Ahmedabad vide impugned orders dated 05/03/2010 passed an order to suspend implementation and operation of the impugned order and sentence during pendency of the appeals and the respective applicants is ordered to be released on the same bail as in the trial Court with fresh bond during pendency of the appeals, however, the respective applicants is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 1 lakh in each of the application. Hence, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the orders passed by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Ahmedabad dated 05/03/2010 below Exh. 4 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 88/2010 to 94/2010 in so far as directing the respective applicants to deposit a sum of Rs. 1 lakh in each of the appeals while suspending the sentence, the respective applicants have preferred the present applications.