2 run concurrently. Therefore, the maximum punishment which is awarded is the life imprisonment in respect of the conviction under Section 302 IPC. The conviction appellant by filing challenged appeal in the the aforesaid High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad. The State also felt aggrieved by the life imprisonment given to the appellant and, therefore, preferred an appeal for enhancing the sentence. By the impugned judgment dated 08.03.2016, the High Court has dismissed the appeal of the appellant thereby maintaining the conviction. At the same time, the appeal preferred by the State has imprisonment been accepted life is of and allowed. substituted with The death penalty. In these appeals preferred by the appellant, there is a challenge to the conviction as well as imposition of death penalty. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at length insofar as the conviction of the appellant is concerned. It may be recorded that it is a case of circumstantial evidence as there were no eye-witness to the crime allegedly committed by the appellant. The criminal machinery was set into motion on a complaint brother filed of the by Aniket Shankarrao deceased (Mansi), Deshpande, who was residing with him at the time of the incident. According to