20.12APPA719.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 719 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 497/2011 Yashwant Mahadeo Magre .vs. The State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. V.S. Raut, Advocate for applicant. Mr. A.S. Fulzele, A.P.P. for respondent. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS & PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. DATED : DECEMBER 20, 2011. 1] By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending decision of the appeal. The case against the applicant rests on circumstantial evidence. The trial Court has highlighted the circumstances against the accused. The circumstances which the trial Court holds against the accused are (i) homicidal death of deceased, (ii) a love affair between deceased and cousin of original accused no.1 which prosecution claims to be a circumstance of motive, and (iii) the deceased being last seen alive in the company of the accused in the afternoon, 20.12APPA719.11 2 i.e. at 4 p.m. on 25.8.2009 by PW.7, PW.8 & PW.9. The evidence of PW.7 & PW.9 is to the extent that deceased was last seen alive in the company of the accused between 9 to 9.30 p.m. on the same day. In the test identification parade, the appellant has been identified. Certain clothes came to be recovered at the behest of the appellant/ accused which were found stained with blood. 2] The learned Counsel for the applicant has urged before us that the evidence of PW.7, PW.8 & PW.9 in respect of seeing deceased in the company of the accused a few hours before the death of the deceased is extremely weak piece of circumstantial evidence. It is also urged before us that the test identification parade would be vitiated on account of the fact that photographs of the deceased had been shown to the identifying witnesses. It is also urged before us that the accused were unknown to the witnesses and the delay in holding of the test identification parade which is of nearly three months would vitiate the test identification parade. 3] The learned A.P.P. has urged before us for dismissal of the present application as an application of another accused, namely, accused Anil Mohanrao 20.12APPA719.11 3 Nannaware was dismissed by us by our order dated 15.9.2011 and the evidence against the present applicant and accused Anil is similar. 4] The submissions advanced before us by the learned Counsel for the applicant pertain to reappreciation of evidence which cannot be done at this stage. The fact that the applicant is a young person and is the sole earning member of the family or that the applicant was on bail during trial are not the circumstances which would in any manner persuade us to release the applicant on bail post his conviction. The submissions pertain to reappreciation of evidence which cannot be done at this stage. 5] It appears that we have already expedited the hearing of Criminal Appeal No. 116/2011. We accordingly also expedite the hearing of the present appeal. The accused are at liberty to file private paper-book if they so desire. The application stands rejected. Judge Judge J.