Crim.Appln.3465/10 in Crim.Appeal 375/10 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3465/2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.375/2010 Ghanshyam s/o Mesaji Jondhale, age 60 yrs., occu.nil r/o Jaibhimnagar, Nanded. ...Applicant.. Versus The State of Maharashtra, through Police Station, Vazirabad, Nanded. ...Respondent... ..... Shri R.A. Tambe, Advocate appointed for applicant. Shri N.R. Shaikh, APP for respondent. ..... CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE: 16.12.2010 PER COURT : 1] This is an application filed by the applicant / accused seeking suspension of Crim.Appln.3465/10 in Crim.Appeal 375/10 - 2 - his substantive sentence and his enlargement on bail pending the decision of the Criminal Appeal No.375/2010. The applicant / accused has been convicted on the allegations that the applicant / accused had killed his wife and his mother in law with an axe. Prosecution hash examined PW 9 Staff Nurse and PW 15 Laxmibai as eye witnesses to the incident. Apart from the testimony of the eye witnesses, the prosecution has examined other witnesses, who point out that the accused was seen in the veranda of the hospital wearing blood stained clothes and brandishing a blood stained axe. The trial Court accepted the evidence of the prosecution and accordingly convicted and sentenced the applicant. 2] Shri R.A. Tambe, learned counsel for the applicant, has urged before us that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses falls short of proving the offence against the applicant beyond reasonable doubt. It is urged before us that no reliance could have been placed on the testimony of the PW 9 - staff nurse as well as PW 15 Laxmibai, who claim to be eye witnesses to the incident. The learned APP has pointed out to us from the judgment of the trial Court about the existence of a strong prima facie case against the applicant. 3] With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, we have perused the record and proceedings and upon such perusal, we find that there is a strong prima facie case against the applicant. In such circumstances, the applicant is not entitled to seek suspension of his substantive sentence and his enlargement on Crim.Appln.3465/10 in Crim.Appeal 375/10 - 3 - bail pending the decision of the appeal. In that light of the matter, therefore, we dismiss the application filed by the applicant. We quantify the fees payable to the learned counsel appointed on behalf of the applicant for arguing the present application at Rs.1,000/- (rupees one thousand only). (A.V. POTDAR, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.) ndk/cr1612101