BHAVESH KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the material available on record.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants urge that the entire prosecution case is unbelievable. The incident took place after a trivial quarrel at the fuel pump where, the deceased was working. One of the assailants was allegedly attending the call of nature when he was obstructed whereafter the quarrel ensued. The incident is of 24.04.2016 wherein, Heer Singh injured received some injuries and was taken to the Mandar Hospital from where he was taken to Palanpur. Initially no injury report was prepared and if prepared, was not produced and proved on record by the prosecuting agency. No specific injury has been attributed to any of the eight convicted accused as having been inflicted to the deceased. Admittedly, the accused had no motive to murder the deceased Heer Singh. They submitted that all the appellants were on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty of bail so granted to them and thus, they deserve the same indulgence during the pendency of the appeal also.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by appellants' counsel.