ORDER 1. Delay condoned. Leave granted. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 7th January, 2013 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Criminal Appeal No.287/2011 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellantaccused and upheld the order of conviction and sentence dated 03.02.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhokar in Sessions Case No.44 of 2010 by which the appellant along with coaccused Sheshrao was prosecuted and eventually convicted for offence of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Both were awarded life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/each, in default of which to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. 4. It is brought to our notice that the coaccused named Sheshrao, who also suffered conviction along with the present appellant, had filed criminal appeals in this Court. This Court, by order dated 23.08.2017 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 14801481 of 2017 (Sheshrao vs. State of Maharashtra) gave him the benefit of doubt and accordingly altered his conviction from Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC. In other words, to that extent his conviction was altered from Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC. 5. It is not disputed that so far as the present appellant is concerned, his role and that of Sheshrao(Co accused) is almost identical in commission of the crime in question. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent State of Maharashtra has not disputed this factual scenario arising in the case. 6. We are, therefore, inclined to follow the reasoning and the conclusion arrived at by this Court in Sheshrao's case supra. 7. We accordingly allow the appeal in part and while modifying the conviction and sentence, convert the appellant's conviction from Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC to that of Section 304 Part II of IPC. 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, however, submits that the appellant has already undergone near about nine years in jail and therefore, the appellant be awarded jail sentence of already undergone. 9. Having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to accept his submission. 10. 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, however, submits that the appellant has already undergone near about nine years in jail and therefore, the appellant be awarded jail sentence of already undergone. 9. Having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to accept his submission. 10. In view of the above, we award the sentence to the appellant of the period already undergone. 11. Since the accused appellant is still in jail, he is directed to be released forthwith, unless required in any other case.