1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.(APPA)598 OF 2011 GANESH LAXMAN RATHOD VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRRA ______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri E. W. Nawab, Advocate for the applicant in Crm.appl.no.598/11. Shri C. H. Jaltare Advocate for appellant in Criminal Appeal No.370 of 2011. Shri T. A. Mirza, APP for the State Coram : P.V. HARDAS AND S.B. DESHMUKH,JJ. Date : 12 th OCTOBER 2011. By this application, the applicant seeks leave of this Court to assist the learned Public Prosecutor in the conduct of this appeal. We have heard Shri E. W. Nawab, learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Counsel for the respondents to this application. We see no impediment whatsoever in allowing this application and accordingly, this application is allowed and permission as prayed for by the applicant in this application is granted. Application is allowed accordingly. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.565 OF 2011. The application, seeking suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and enlargement of the applicant on bail, had been filed earlier before this 2 Court, which had been withdrawn with leave to file application subsequently. This is how the present application has been filed and is listed before us. The applicant herein stands convicted for having committed the murder of deceased Yogesh Nandlal Mishra on 22-2-2010. Deceased Yogesh had sustained as many as 18 injuries, which are adverted to by the Trial Court in paragraph no.26 of the Judgment. The Postmortem on the dead body of deceased Yogesh had been conducted by PW-1 Dr. Chaudhari and he has proved the postmortem report. The conviction, principally, rests upon the solitary testimony of PW-4 Amit, who is also the first informant. Mr. Jaltare, learned Counsel for the applicant has urged before us that the evidence of PW-4 clearly discloses that all the injuries were not caused to deceased Yogesh at one instance, but were spread over in two instances, i.e at two different point of time the aforesaid injuries came to be inflicted. It is further urged by Shri Jaltare, learned Counsel for the applicant that the possibility that deceased Yogesh was himself armed with a small kitchen knife, which is said to be the weapon of assault, cannot be ruled out. It is further submitted that the version of PW-4 is a coloured version which has been given to suit the prosecution case. Learned APP has supported the finding recorded by the Trial Court and has urged before us to dismiss the application on the ground that a strong prima facie case exists for supporting the conviction. We have examined the submissions advanced before 3 us by the learned Counsel for the applicant and we have also examined the finding recorded by the Trial Court. The submissions advanced before us by the learned Counsel for the applicant pertain to re-appreciation of evidence which cannot be done at this stage. Suffice it to say that the Trial Court has placed implicit reliance on the testimony PW-4 and has found that he is a reliable eye witness on whom the conviction could be rested. In that light of the matter, therefore, according to us, no case for suspending the substantive sentence and enlarging the application on bail is made out though the applicant is said to be a young person, aged 25 years. In the light of the aforesaid facts, the present application is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE |mule|