MADHAV YASHWANT PAWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) This is an application for suspension of execution of sentence in terms of Section 389[1] of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicant/ accused is convicted by the Special Court in MPID Case No.5/2016 vide judgment and order dated 31.10.2020. The appellant / accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 420, 468, 406 r/w 120B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code , Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments Act, 1999 r/w 120B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code , and Sections 45S , 58B [5A] of the Reserve Bank of India Act r/w 120B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code . The trial Court though awarded different punishment for each section, however, the maximum punishment imposed is to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 years and total fine of Rs. 1,26,000/- with default clause has been imposed.

(3.) The learned counsel for the applicant/ appellant would submit that almost the accused has undergone 5 years and 9 months of imprisonment, since he was under trial prisoner from 14.03.2015. According to him, if the execution of substantive sentence has not been suspended, the very purpose of filing the appeal would be frustrated. He would submit that due to poor financial condition, the appellant was not able to deposit the fine amount. In this regard he has attracted my attention to a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Satyendra Kumar Mehra .vrs. State of Jharkhand - (2018) 15 SCC 139, particularly to paragraph no.36 of the judgment wherein it is expressed that the Appellate Court can also suspend the sentence of imprisonment as well as of fine.