1 Criminal Appeal No.213 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.213 OF 2011 State of Maharashtra APPELLANT VERSUS Dhansing Uttamsing Bijarne (Jat) Age-52 years, Occu-Agriculturist, R/o.Rajur, Tq.Bodwad, Dist. Jalgaon RESPONDENT Mr.S.K.Tambe, learned A.P.P. for appellant/State (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 12/07/2011 PER COURT : 1. Originally, this was filed as a criminal application, however leave was granted to correct the cause title and to convert this into an appeal. This appeal is for an enhancement of the sentence. The learned A.P.P. for the applicant also states that the appeal has been filed for enhancement of the sentence. The prayer clause of the appeal makes it abundantly clear. 2. The respondent herein has been convicted for an offence punishable u/s. 304(II) and 201 of the IPC and has been sentenced to suffer RI for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to which to undergo further RI for 6 months and further sentenced to suffer RI for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- with the default 2 Criminal Appeal No.213 of 2011 stipulation of undergoing further RI for one month in the event of non payment of fine. The respondent came to be acquitted for an offence punishable u/s. 302 of the IPC. This appeal has not been filed questioning the acquittal of the respondent and consequently we have to examine if the sentence awarded by the Trial Court needs to be enhanced. 3. The maximum sentence which can be awarded for an offence punishable u/s. 304(II) of the IPC is imprisonment for 10 years or fine or both. The respondent herein has been convicted for imprisonment of 10 years and has also been sentenced to pay fine. Offence punishable u/s. 201 of the IPC is punishable with a maximum sentence of 3 years and with fine. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, we find that the respondent has been punished with the maximum sentence permissible in Law. In that light of the matter, therefore, there is no question of enhancement of the sentence on the ground that the respondent has been awarded in-adequate sentence. 5. Resultantly, we find that there is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/JULY 2011/cri.appeal 213-11