SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Bom) 1065

BHARATI DANGRE
Sunil Jagannath Tibe – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Priyal G.Sarda, Advocate, Vaibhav G.Bagade, Advocate, Suraj S.Hulke, Advocate, Y.Y.Dabake, Advocate

JUDGMENT

1. The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment in Special Case No.117 of 2004 delivered by the Special Judge for CBI on 18th February 2010, thereby convicting him for offence punishable under Section 461 of the IPC and sentencing him to suffer RI for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, and in default of payment of fine, undergo SI for 30 days. By the very same judgment, the appellant has been convicted of the offence punishable under section 13(1)(d)(ii) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short 'P.C. Act") and sentenced to suffer RI for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- in default, undergo SI for 30 days. Substantive sentences being directed to run concurrently. On the judgment being pronounced, the appellant was directed to be taken into custody.

2. On the appeal being filed and registered, on 12 th March 2010, it is admitted. The order imposing sentence, being suspended, the appellant came to be released on bail on furnishing fresh bond. Resultantly, when the Appeal is heard, the appellant is on bail.

3. The appellant working as Police Constable came to be charged along with three accused persons on 8th September 2006, he being arraigne

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top