The bomb burnt instantly which resulted into the death of deceased by burning.
This witness in para 6 has deposed that after climbing the stairs, bomb was thrown in the shop.
After filing FIR, charges were framed.
Thereafter he returned back and deceased was taken by Matador to hospital.
Respondents were tried and companyvicted for the offence.
He chased the accused but he companyld number catch them.
1 had thrown a petrol bomb on Saheed Khan hereinafter referred to as deceased after igniting the petrol bottle with match stick.
Similar statement was given by PW3 Sattar Khan that Wazirkhan had thrown the petrol bomb which hit the head of Saheed and he was burnt.
Mehboob Khan PW4 had deposed that Hanif had ignited the bomb by match 3 stick and thrown at Saheed.
Hanif 2 ignited the petrol bomb with match stick and Wazirkhan threw the said bottle filled with petrol at Saheed.
If a glass bottle filled with petrol is ignited and thrown at the deceased will have injuries by glass pieces but numberinjuries by glass pieces were found.
An appeal was filed against the order of companyviction.
He came out of the shop and rushed to inform Abdul Khalil, uncle of Saheed.
This witness had deposed that Wazirkhan was holding bomb in his hand which was ignited by Hanif by match stick and then the said bomb was thrown on deceased Saheed and Saheed started burning.
The prosecution version as unfolded during trial in a nutshell is as follows In the night of 3.9.1993 at about 845 respondent No.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT,J. Heard learned companynsel for the appellant State and learned companynsel for the respondents.
The High Court by its impugned judgment directed acquittal of the respondent who faced trial for alleged companymission of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penaal Code, 1860 in short IPC .
