1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 679 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2011 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 59 OF 2011 (Rajendra Kasana Chauhan .v. State of Maharashtra) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri F.T. Mirza, Advocate for the applicant/appellant. Shri R.S. Nayak, APP for the respondent/State. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 16TH NOVEMBER, 2011. By this application, the applicant/appellant seeks suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending the decision of the appeal. The applicant stands convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that the applicant had committed murder of his wife- Kusum on 15.10.1999 at about 09:00 a.m. The strongest circumstance, which the trial Court has found against the present applicant, is that the deceased-Kusum had died as a result of throttling while the burns were postmortem injuries. There are other circumstances, which, according to the trial Court, complete the chain of circumstances which excludes every hypothesis of innocence of the accused and unerringly points to the guilt of the accused. Shri F.T. Mirza, the learned Counsel for the applicant has urged before us that undisputedly the evidence of the prosecution unfolds that the applicant along with one Babulal had rushed to the house on hearing the cries of deceased and they had noticed the deceased in flames. Shri Mirza, the learned Counsel for the applicant further states that the applicant along with Babulal extinguished the flames and deceased was found to have 2 thereafter succumbed to her injuries. It is also urged before us by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the deceased was alive as the deceased had handed over the child to the applicant and the applicant had thereafter gone to the house of Babulal where he had heard the cries of deceased-Kusum. The submissions advanced before us by Shri Mirza, the learned Counsel for the applicant pertain to re-appreciation of the evidence which cannot be done at this stage. Suffice it to state that the trial Court had found strong circumstances, which, according to us, prima facie establish the complicity of the present applicant in the commission of the crime. We are, therefore, not inclined to allow this application and suspend the substantive sentence and direct the release of the applicant on bail. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. The applicant is at liberty to urge for early hearing as the paper book is ready. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.