appellant by giving him the benefit of doubt. Submissions on behalf of the Respondent-State: - 21. Per contra, Ms. Garima Prasad, learned Additional Advocate General representing the State of Uttar Pradesh, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellant and urged that two Courts, i.e., the trial Court and the High Court, have recorded concurrent findings of facts while convicting the appellant and affirming his conviction and hence, this Court should be slow to interfere in such concurrent findings of facts. She submitted that it is clear from the testimony of the three eye witnesses i.e. Ram Prakash(PW-1), Sultan Singh(PW-2) and Ram Naresh(PW-5) that the accused appellant Jagvir Singh and the accused Omkar fired gunshots at Sanju(deceased) causing his death at the spot. She implored the Court to dismiss the appeal. 1222. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the impugned