JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 2. The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's simple imprisonment, vide judgment dated 21.2.2019 passed by learned additional Sessions Judge No.1, Nimbahera Camp Badi Sadri, District Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No. 62/2016. 3. Learned counsel Shri Solanki submits that there is no eye witness of the incident. The accused himself received burn injuries while trying to save his wife deceased Smt. Sugna. Thus, he craves indulgence of bail to the appellant during pendency of the appeal. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor points out that the appellant himself received burn injuries and thus, his presence in the house at the time of incident is well established. The appellant did not take any such plea in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that he got the burn injuries while trying to save his wife. In this view of the matter, learned Public Prosecutor submits that the circumstances under which the deceased Smt. Sugna received burn injuries have not been explained properly and accordingly, the appellant has rightly been held guilty of the offence of murder. He thus, craves dismissal of the application for suspension of sentence. 5. Having given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at the Bar and after going through the impugned judgment, looking to the nature and gravity of the allegations attributed to the appellant, we are not inclined to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant by the trial Court. 6. The application for suspension of sentence is therefore, dismissed as being devoid of merit.