Shiv Charan and V.K.Dixit, JJ. - (1.) SRI Abhai Saxena, advocate has filed parcha-pairvi on behalf of appellant Khursheed in Criminal Appeal No. 5099 of 2008 and on behalf of appellant Mustazir in Criminal Appeal No. 6886 of 2008.
(2.) LET the parcha-pairvi of Sri Abhai Saxena be placed on record in both the above mentioned appeals. Objection filed by the learned A.G.A. against the prayer of bail of the appellants be taken on record. Both the above mentioned criminal appeals have been instituted against the judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Moradabad in S.T. No. 364 of 2006, Asrar Ahmad v. State, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302/34, 323/34 and 504, I.P.C., P. S. Asmauli, Moradabad. We have also perused trial court record and relevant documents available on record. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that as many as seven accused persons faced trial and all the accused persons were convicted for the offence under Sections 302/34 and 149, I.P.C. and were also convicted under Sections 147, 148 and 504, I.P.C. and they have been sentenced to undergo maximum life imprisonment. Accused persons were also convicted and sentenced on other counts also.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants argued that co-accused Tajammul had already been granted bail vide order dated 23.9.2008 in Criminal Appeal No. 5931 of 2008 and other accused persons to whom other weapons were attributed had also been granted bail earlier. That Tajammul was armed with Tabal a sharp edged weapon, but the evidence was produced by the prosecution that Tabal was used from reverse side and in this connection learned counsel also argued that as per the averments of the F.I.R. Khursheed was also armed with Boori a pointed heavy weapon and it is said that this Boori was used from reverse side as a blunt object. That Mustazir was also armed with a lathi, but recovery has been shown of a Bamboo (danda) on his pointing out. Learned counsel also argued that injury No. 1 was fatal. Hence, this injury was stitched wound. That it has not been alleged that by whom this injury No. 1 was caused. Learned counsel also argued that the fact is that some incident took place during the process of polling and besides the deceased Zahid Husain, other persons also sustained injuries in the incident. That the trial court opined that in case appellants might have taken this defence then the case might have ended in acquittal. That the appellants were on bail during the trial and they had not misused the liberty of bail.;