Shri Kant Tripathi, J. - (1.) COUNTER affidavit filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.
(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the judgment and order dated 01.03.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No. 3, Basti in S.T. No. 227 of 1999 (State Vs. Ramdas and others). The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that one person died and two persons sustained injuries from the accused side. One person died and one person sustained injuries from the complainant side. In the cross case too a judgment of conviction has been recorded. The question of aggressorship is involved in the present matter. Learned counsel for the appellants lastly submitted that the appellants were on bail during the trial and never abused the same and are in jail from the date of conviction. It was next submitted that in case the appellants were not released on bail, the appeal would, in due course, become infructuous as there was no prospect of the appeal being heard in near future due to heavy dockets.
(3.) IN my opinion, prima facie, the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants have substance, therefore, it is just and expedient to exercise the discretion in favour of the appellant.;