{1} Cri. Application No.2372/2011 drp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2372 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.280 OF 2011 Waman Gulab Kadam & Others APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.R.N.Dhorde, advocate h/f Mr.V.R.Dhorde, for applicants Mr.S.D.Kaldate, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] DATE : 26 th July 2011 PER COURT: 1. This is an application by which the applicants seek suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment for life and their enlargement on bail, pending the decision of the appeal. The applicants stand convicted for having committed murder of deceased Kausar on 27.05.2005 by pouring kerosene on him and setting him ablaze. Prosecution principally relied on the two dying declarations at Exhibit-68 and Exhibit-54, which were recorded by {2} Cri. Application No.2372/2011 the Police Officer and the Executive Magistrate, respectively. Trial Court found both the dying declarations to be consistent and which implicate the present applicants. 2. Mr.R.N.Dhorde, learned counsel for the applicants, has urged before us that the deceased had sustained 95% burns and obviously could not have been in a position to give his statement. It is, therefore, urged before us that the deceased was not in a fit mental condition to have given such elaborate dying declarations at Exhibit-68 and Exhibit-54. It is also urged before us by Mr.Dhorde, learned counsel for the applicants, that the dying declarations themselves indicate that wife of the deceased was an eye witness to the incident and an adverse inference ought to have been drawn against the prosecution for its failure to examine the wife of the deceased. It is also urged before us that adverse inference, for failure to examine the wife of the deceased would far outweigh the two dying declarations at Exhibit-68 and Exhibit-54. Learned APP has urged for dismissal of the application on the ground that a strong prima facie case exists in support of the judgment of the trial court. 3. The submissions advanced before us by learned counsel for the applicants, pertain to re-appreciation of the evidence, which cannot be done at this stage. However, since the applicants were on bail during the trial and since we are hearing criminal appeals of the year 2010-2011, we permit the applicants to {3} Cri. Application No.2372/2011 file a private paper book within a week from today and direct the Registry to set down the appeal for final hearing as soon as the paper book is filed. 4. Application is accordingly dismissed with the aforesaid directions. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] [P.V.HARDAS, J.] drp/B11/criapln2372-11