1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION APPA NO.302 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.518 OF 2009. NANDKISHOR S/O LAXMAN DHODARE AND OTHERS VS 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. Abhay Sambre Advocate for the applicant. Mr. T. A. Mirza, APP for respondent State. CORAM : A.H. JOSHI AND A.B. CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATE : 18th JANUARY 2011. 1. This application is filed by five accused persons who are appellants. These five persons are praying for suspension of sentence and release on bail. 2. Heard Learned Advocate for the applicant and learned APP. 3. Perused the impugned judgment and oral evidence. 4. Learned Advocate for the applicant has placed on record copies of depositions of various witnesses. 5. Admittedly, except the applicant no.5 Vasant Durgaji Waghade, all accused have been named 2 by eye witnesses. It is a case of offence under Section 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 6. Considering the fact that the appellant nos.1 to 4 have been identified by all eye witnesses, they do not stand a chance for suspension of sentence. 7. In so far as the applicant no.5 Vasanta Waghade is concerned, the learned Advocate for the applicant has tried to distinguish his case arguing that he is identified by PW-7. He further states that the only role attributed to accused no.28 Vasant Waghade is that he has stopped the bullock cart and no further role is attributed. 8. We have perused the testimony of PW-7. We are unable to subscribe and to agree with the submissions of the learned Advocate Mr. Abhay Sambre for the reasons that in paragraph no.3 where PW-7 has identified the accused persons. Undoubtedly, she has identified Vasant Waghade, however, she refers to the accused persons as “they” referring to those who have assaulted and thereby she embraces in the fold of identification of the applicant Vasanta as well. 9. We, therefore, consider that the case of the accused no.28 Vasanta Waghade – appellant no.5 3 does not stand on a different footing and therefore, either of the appellants are not entitled for further relief of suspension of sentence. 10. Application is rejected. Judge Judge |muley|