ZAHID Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Learned Counsel for parties and perused the record.

(2.) Learned Counsel for appellant submitted that this case is based on circumstantial evidence and accused-appellant has been convicted under Section, 302 read with Section 120-B I.P.C., although initially, accused-appellant was tried upon for charges under Sections, 120-B, 147, 307, 149, 302/149 I.P.C. and 3(2)(V) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It is also a submission of Learned Counsel that the incident took place inside the house of accused Wasim and the accused appellant Zahid being his brother-in-law (sister's husband) had only accompanied to his house where his wife was staying. Learned Counsel contends that accused Wasim had a suspicion that his estranged wife who was staying in his house, had illicit relationship with deceased Ram Lakhan. Hence, having seen the deceased sleeping there in underwear, he got enraged. and provoked and in the process, loosing his self control, he would fired gunshots causing injuries to the deceased and to his wife. Thus, it would not be a case of murder but culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

(3.) It is also contended that the accused appellant was on bail throughout during the trial and there is no such allegation that he had misused the concession of bail. Now he is lodged in jail since the date of the impugned judgment. On the other hand learned State Counsel does not have any serious ground to refute the contentions of Learned Counsel for appellant.