Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has argued that the trial court has grossly erred in sentencing and convicting the appellant-applicant vide impugned judgment. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant while referring to the statements of Nanda (PW-1), Gautam (PW-2), Smt. Bhagwani (PW-5), Limba (PW-6), Smt. Kankudi (PW-9), Veniram (PW-10) and Smt. Khudi Bai (PW-11) has submitted that there is contradiction in the statements of the above-referred so-called eye witnesses. It is further submitted that all the above-named witnesses have submitted that their houses are situated far from the house of the deceased. It is also submitted that omnibus allegations have been levelled regarding role of the appellant. It is also argued that the prosecution witnesses, in their evidence, have admitted that the quarrel took place on the spur of moment on account of dispute with regard to grazing cattle. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, the incident took place in the heat of moment on account of grazing cattle in the agricultural fields of the complainant and in such circumstances, it can be gathered that the appellant-applicant had no intention to kill the deceased. It is submitted that all the injuries on the body of the injured persons are simple in nature and from this fact also, it can be gathered that the appellant-applicant had no intention to kill the deceased. Learned counsel has submitted that the appellant-applicant is in jail from more than eight years and hearing of appeal is likely to
