SHIV MURAT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. K. Singh, J. Heard Mr. M. D. Shukla, learned counsel for the revisionist at length and Mr. A. K. Verma, learned A. G. A.

(2.) THE argument of Mr. Shukla is that in the impugned judgment and order passed by the Illrd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jaunpur in Sessions Trial No. 61/1988, dated 4-10-94, injuries of the two injured persons who are witnesses for the prosecu tion in this case have not been properly considered by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. Further Mr. Shukla argues that a counter case is also there in which the revisionist has been convicted and the ap peal is pending against the judgment of conviction. On this ground he also wants parity and prays that when his clients have been convicted the opposite party in this revision petition should not get acquittal.