Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) It is contended on behalf of the appellants that the appellants have been acquitted by the trial Court under Section 304-B I.P.C. and they have been convicted under Section 306 I.P.C. to seven years' rigorous imprisonment and under Section 498-A I.P.C. to three years' rigorous imprisonment. They are in judicial custody since 29.9.2007, therefore, they have already remained in custody for more than three years and nine months, whereas disposal of the appeal is likely to take time, looking to long pendency of old criminal cases, wherein accused persons are in jail and also on bail. He also referred the statements of prosecution witnesses as well as doctors and submitted that looking to all the facts and circumstances of the present case, the sentence of imprisonment of the appellants may be suspended during pendency of this appeal.
(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application contending that the complainant has already filed appeal before this Court against order of acquittal of the appellants under Section 304-B I.P.C. and the same has been admitted, therefore, the fact of acquitting the appellants from offence under Section 304-B I.P.C. by the trial Court should not be taken into consideration, while granting bail. They further submitted that the appellants were not on bail during trial, therefore, their bail application may be dismissed.;