Heard learned advocate Mr. Rachh for the petitioner. He submitted that the Courts below committed error in interpreting the documents produced before the trial Court and the oral evidence has not been properly appreciated.
In view of above, RULE.
As regards suspension of sentence of imprisonment passed by the lower appellate Court, learned advocate Mr. Rachh submitted that the petitioner was on bail during the trial and appeal before the lower appellate Court. But, after the judgment of the lower appellate Court, the petitioner has surrendered and is now in custody. It appears that the petitioner is sentenced to undergo imprisonment of two years. It is stated that the amount of fine imposed by the trial Court has been paid. There is nothing to indicate that the petitioner misused the liberty while he was on bail. In view of the fact that the petitioner is sentenced to undergo short sentence and it is not likely that the main matter would be heard in the near future, the order of substantive sentence of imprisonment is required to be suspended and the petitioner is required to be released on bail during pendency of Revision Application.
In view of above, the order of substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed by the lower appellate Court on 8.6.2012 in Criminal Appeal No.28 of 2009 is suspended during the hearing and final disposal of Criminal Revision Application No. 305 of 2012 and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond of Rs. 5,000/- with a surety of like amount before the trial Court on usual terms.
Direct service is permitted.
(BANKIM.N.MEHTA, J.) shekhar* Top