{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2842 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.146 OF 2010 Sudam s/o Kacharu Sarkate APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr. B.V.Dhage, Advocate for the applicant Mr. N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] DATE : 7th September 2010 PER COURT: 1. By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of substantive sentence of imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending the decision of the appeal. The applicant / appellant is alleged to have committed murder of his wife Nanhabai on 20.05.2008. The case against the applicant / accused rests on circumstantial evidence. The circumstances, as culled out by the trial court, are – (i) The applicant / accused had treated his wife {2} with cruelty (ii) the applicant had lured his wife to the place where she was found dead (iii) the accused was seen running from the scene of the offence (iv) Clothes of the accused were found blood stained at the time of his arrest and (v) Recovery of the weapon at the behest of the applicant and the weapon being found with blood stained matching with the blood of the deceased. 2. Mr.Dhage, learned counsel for the applicant has urged before us that the prosecution has miserably failed in establishing the first circumstance. The prosecution has thus failed in establishing the motive for the applicant to commit the crime. It is further stated that other reliable witnesses, who are available, have not been examined. It is also urged before us that the memorandum, leading to the discovery of the weapon at the behest of the accused, has not been proved and the weapon has been seized from an open place. Learned APP supported the findings of the trial court and has prayed for dismissal of this application on the ground that the submissions advanced before us by the learned counsel for the applicant, pertain to re-appreciation of the evidence. 3. The trial court, upon examining the evidence, has culled out certain circumstances and has held those circumstances as proved. The submissions advanced before us by Mr.Dhage, learned counsel for the applicant, pertain to re- appreciation of evidence, which cannot be done at this stage. {3} Suffice it to state that this is not a case of no evidence. The question as to whether the circumstances found established and the question as to whether the circumstances so established form a complete chain, which exclusively links every hypothesis of the innocence of the accused and unquestionably points towards the guilt of the accused, is a question which can only be answered in the final hearing of the appeal. In that light of the matter, therefore, we dismiss this application. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] [P.V.HARDAS, J.] drp/B10/criapln2842-10