20.12APPA737.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 737 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 502/2011 Mallesh s/o Nana @ Nanayya Jupaka .vs. The 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. Shriniwas Deshpande, Advocate (appointed) for applicant. Mr. R.S. Nayak, A.P.P. for respondent. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS & PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. DATED : DECEMBER 20, 2011. 1] By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending decision of the appeal. The applicant stands convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to imprisonment for life for having committed murder of deceased Pochubai, wife of the applicant/ accused. 2] The prosecution has examined PW.2 Chilka daughter of the accused and PW.1 Yallayya, who is the 20.12APPA737.11 2 son-in-law. Both these witnesses are eye-witnesses to the incident. Prosecution has also examined PW.3 Baban who states that he had seen the appellant/accused running away brandishing an axe. PW.3 Baban also attempted to apprehend the applicant/accused but the applicant/accused was successful in evading PW.3 Baban and in fleeing. An axe came to be recovered at the behest of the applicant/ accused which was found to be blood-stained. The report of the Chemical Analyser shows that the said axe was stained with blood of ‘A’ group which matched the blood group of deceased. Additionally we find that the clothes of the applicant/accused were also stained with blood of ‘A’ group which matched the blood group of deceased. 3] Mr. Shriniwas Deshpande, learned Advocate (appointed) for applicant, has urged before us that the evidence in respect of the guilt of the applicant/accused is extremely weak particularly as it rests upon the appreciation of evidence of PW.2 Chilka and PW.1 Yellayya. It is also urged before us that looking to the tenor of evidence of these two witnesses as well as the contradictions and omissions which have been elicited in the cross- examination of these two witnesses, no reliance at all could have been placed by the trial Court on the evidence of 20.12APPA737.11 3 these two witnesses. It is also urged before us that the evidence relating to the discovery of axe and the staining of clothes is also riddled with various infirmities and thus the trial Court ought to have acquitted the present applicant. 4] The submissions advanced before us by the learned Counsel for the applicant, though attractive, pertain to reappreciation of evidence which cannot be done at this stage. Suffice it to state that the trial Court has found sufficient material against the applicant/accused and the conviction cannot be said to be based on no evidence. We are, therefore, not inclined to accept the prayer of the applicant/accused for suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment. There being thus no merit in the present application, the application is dismissed. Hearing of the appeal is expedited. Fees payable to the learned Counsel appointed for the applicant/accused for arguing the present bail application is quantified at Rs.1000/-. Judge Judge J.