RAGHUVEERSINGH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present application is the second application filed by the present applicant for suspension of sentence and releasing him on bail. It will not be out of place to mention here that, the present applicant's appeal has been admitted by this Court on 10-12-2019 and on the same day this Court by a detailed order rejected the application filed for suspension of sentence and releasing him on bail.

(2.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Arvind Deshmukh for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. P. V. Diggikar for respondent-State.

(3.) It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that, the applicant has been convicted in Sessions Case No.150 of 2012 by learned Additional Sessions judge 4, Parbhani on 2211- 2019 for the offence punishable under Section 395 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code. The maximum sentence that has been imposed is rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years. Though in previous application i.e. Criminal Application No.3989 of 2019, it was pointed out to this Court that, the sentence that has been imposed on the applicant is small sentence/ short sentence and as per the ratio laid down in Kiran Kumar v. State of M.P ., reported in (2001) 9 SCC 211, the Court ought to have considered the facts in favour of the applicant and suspended the sentence till the decision of the appeal, however the application has been rejected. The applicant is in jail since the date of decision and he has undergone four months. The evidence of the witnesses clearly show that, the case against the applicant is not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Only on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the conviction has been awarded though the prosecution had failed to prove the complete chain of circumstances. The appeal is not likely to be heard and decided at the earliest and it may take about four to five years to reach to the decision and under such circumstance the applicant would be required to suffer a lot. Though the earlier application was rejected, this Court has every power to reconsider the application in the situation that the final hearing is not possible. Further in such pandemic situation, in view of the short sentence that has been imposed, the applicant be released on bail.