3 Learned counsel for the the petitioner/appellant/A-4 has drawn the attention of this Court to the testimonies of P.Ws.1 and 3 and would submit that according to the prosecution, they were the eyewitnesses to the occurrence and even as per the testimony of P.W.1, he was not aware as to the person who has written the complaint under Ex.P.1 and admittedly, he did not write the complaint and as such, the origin and genesis of the complaint itself if doubtful. It is his further submission that as regards motive aspect, except the testimony of the interest witness, viz., P.W.1, who happens to be the younger brother of the deceased, no other witnesses have spoken to about that fact and P.W.3 did not specifically identify the accused persons, though he has spoken to about the overt acts on the part of each of the accused, viz., A-2 to A-4. Since the case of the prosecution is bristled with very many inconsistencies and improbabilities and since the the petitioner/appellant/A-4 is having a bright chance of success in the appeal, prays for suspension of the substantive sentences of imprisonment. He would also submit that the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed against A-1 has been suspended by this Court.
