ORDER : It is informed by learned Additional Government Advocate that victim has been intimated about filing of the appeal as well as suspension of sentence application. Despite information, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the victim. 2. Report in this regard has been submitted by the Additional Government Advocate and the same is taken on record. 3. Accused-applicants have preferred these applications for suspension of sentence. 4. Heard on applications for suspension of sentence. 5. It is contended by counsel for the applicant that applicants Nandu, Waseem and Kishan Jangam were on bail during trial and all have remained in custody for a period of more than five years. It is also contended that as per the report which was received by the Police; there was cross firing between the two groups. It is further contended that one firearm has been recovered from Nandu, however, as per the FSL report, the bullets were not fired with this firearm. The Court has wrongly interpreted this report. It is further contended that PW/2 is a related witness and PW/3 who is a friend of the deceased is a chance witness and the possibility of their being at the place of occurrence is doubtful for the very reason that they were with the Police to see CCTV footage and to ascertain as to who were present at the scene. It is further contended that PW-3 has deposed that the deceased has informed that Bhupendra has murdered him, which goes to show that PW-3 was not an eye witness. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the suspension of sentence applications. 7. We have considered the contentions. 8. Considering the fact that accused- Nandu, Waseem and Kishan Jangam were on bail during trial and also taking note of the custody period which is more than five years and also the fact that it is a case of cross firing and the bullets which were recovered from the place of occurrence were not fired from the firearm which has been recovered from Nandu, we deem it proper to allow the applications for suspension of sentence. 9. Accordingly, the applications for suspension of sentence are allowed. 9. Accordingly, the applications for suspension of sentence are allowed. It is ordered that the sentence awarded to accused-applicants in Sessions Case No.159/2016, shall remain suspended if the accused-applicants furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- each and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court to the effect that they shall appear before this Court as and when called upon to do so.