Chandrakant Raosaheb Tambe v. The State Of Maharashtra

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1326 OF 2024 IN APEAL/282/2024 CHANDRAKANT RAOSAHEB TAMBE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Nilesh Joshi h/f Mr. V. P. Latange APP for Respondents-State : Ms. S. N. Deshmukh ...

WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 282 OF 2024 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2776 OF 2024 IN APEAL/282/2024 ....

CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, JJ.

Dated : July 28, 2025 PER COURT :- 1.

By this application, applicant / accused who is convicted under Section 302 of IPC, is seeking suspension of his substantive sentence of life imprisonment and his release on bail. 2.

The applicant was charged alongwith 11 (Eleven) other accused for commission of murder of Bajirao Kalyanrao Tambe, on 26.05.2020. The prosecution alleged that the applicant assaulted deceased with knife and inflicted repeated blows on his stomach,

-2due to which, he expired.

3.

The Trial Court, after recording the evidence and considering the arguments, acquitted 11 accused and convicted the applicant / accused as aforesaid.

4.

Heard learned Advocate for the applicant, learned APP for State and learned Advocate for respondent No. 2. Perused the record.

5.

Evidence of two eye-witnesses is recorded by the Trial Court which is consistent on the point of assault by the applicant on the deceased. The deceased has suffered four stab wounds, three on the stomach and one on the right under-arm. The doctor has opined that the death due to excessive haemorrhage due to stab injury to vital organs i.e. liver, spleen, stomach and descending colon (large intestine). The murder weapon is recovered at the instance of applicant / accused and CA Report shows that blood of blood group 'AB', of the deceased was found on the said weapon.

6.

Prima facie, we find sufficient material on record to

-3sustain the conviction of the applicant / accused. The Trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence and has rightly convicted the applicant. No case is made out by the applicant for suspension of sentence.

7.

The application, being devoid of merits, is rejected. (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.) Omkar Joshi