1 Criminal Appl.No.3921 of 2010 in Criminal Appeal No.385 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3921 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.385 OF 2010 Navnath Raosaheb Mhaske APPLICANT VERSUS State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.B.N.Palve, learned counsel for the applicant. Mrs.R.K.Ladda, learned A.P.P. for respondent State. (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 05/01/2011 PER COURT : 1. This is an application by the appellant seeking suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending the decision of the appeal. The appellant stands convicted for an offence punishable u/s. 302 of The IPC on the allegations that the appellant had committed murder of deceased Deepak on 31/12/2008. 2 Criminal Appl.No.3921 of 2010 in Criminal Appeal No.385 of 2010 2. The entire prosecution case revolves around the testimony of P.W.No.6 Ashok, as the other other two eye witnesses examined by the prosecution did not support the prosecution and were declared hostile. The Trial Court placed implicit reliance upon the evidence of P.W.No.6 Ashok as well as the memorandum at Exh.31 and the subsequent panchnama at Exh.32, leading to the recovery of the knife at the instance of the appellant. The medical opinion clearly indicates that the injuries sustained by Dipak were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death and the deceased had died on account of injuries. Thus prima facie, there is strong material against the applicant, and therefore according to us, no case for enlargement of the applicant on bail by suspending the substantive sentence is made out. 3. Mr.Palve, learned counsel for the applicant has urged before us that the statement of P.W.No.6 Ashok was recorded after 10 days and on that sole ground, the Trial Court ought not to have place any reliance on his evidence. According to us, the aforesaid submission pertains to re-appreciation of evidence, which can not be done at this stage. Suffice it to state that the Trial Court has placed reliance on P.W.No.6 Ashok as well as the other circumstantial evidence to hold the applicant guilty of an offence punishable u/s. 302 of The IPC. 4. Additionally we find that the applicant was not on bail during 3 Criminal Appl.No.3921 of 2010 in Criminal Appeal No.385 of 2010 the trial. In the aforesaid circumstances, therefore, we see no merit in the present application and the present application is dismissed. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/JAN. 2011/cri.appl.3921-10