APPA 788/11 Page 1 of 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 788 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 65 of 2010 SUNIL SHAMRAO ATRAM VERSUS STATE OF MAH, THROUGH P.S.O., P.S., SHIRPUR, DIST. YAVATMAL - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. S. P. Gadling, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. A. S. Fulzele, A.P.P. for the respondent/State. CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND P.B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : 14th DECEMBER, 2011. By this application, the applicant/appellant seeks suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending decision of the appeal. The applicant/appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that the applicant had committed murder of deceased Nagorao Atram on 18.05.2006. The case against the applicant is based on circumstantial evidence. Both P.W.3 Natthu Kumre and P.W.4 Diwakar Shedmake state that they had noticed the applicant/accused chasing the deceased brandishing the knife and also state that the deceased ran for some distance and fell on the ground. The witnesses also state about going near APPA 788/11 Page 2 of 3 the deceased and thereafter going towards his house holding blood stained knife. The said knife came to be recovered at the instance of the applicant under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The trial Court, therefore, came to the conclusion that the circumstances clearly established the case against the applicant beyond reasonable doubt. Mr. Gadling, the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant has urged before us that the trial Court has disbelieved the part evidence of the witness in respect of seizure of the clothes of the applicant/accused, but has relied upon the said witness insofar as discovery is concerned. The learned counsel for the applicant/accused has also urged before us that the first informant has also been disbelieved, who claims to have seen the deceased. It is urged before us by the learned counsel that the prosecution has failed to prove the motive and in the absence of cogent and reliable evidence on motive, the conviction of the applicant is unsustainable. The aforesaid submission, according us, pertain to re-appreciation of the evidence, which cannot be done at this stage. Suffice to state that the applicant was not on bail during the trial and the trial Court has found that the offence against the applicant/accused is proved beyond reasonable doubt. In that light of the matter, therefore, we are not inclined to grant the relief as prayed for in this application. The criminal application is APPA 788/11 Page 3 of 3 accordingly dismissed. We, however, expedite hearing of the appeal. JUDGE JUDGE Diwale