Basheer Mohammad vs State of H.P. a/w connected appeal. Cr. Appeal No. 384 of 2025 and Cr. Apeal No. 100 of 2025 Cr. Appeal No. 384 of 2025 21.07.2026. Present: Mr. Arjun Lall, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Jitender K.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondent/State. Cr. Appeal No. 100 of 2025 None for the appellant. Mr. Jitender K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for the respondent/State. Cr. Appeal No. 384 of 2025 A reply has been filed on behalf of the appellant tendering unconditional apology and submitting that the son of appellant had engaged another counsel for filing of the appeal, however, the appellant being illiterate had applied for legal aid. The two appeals were filed because of this confusion and now the appellant wants to withdraw the Criminal Appeal No. 384 of 2025 and wants to pursue Criminal Appeal No.100 of 2025. Considering the fact that two appeals were filed due to the miscommunication and the plea of the appellant that he is illiterate is duly supported by the fact that he has put the thumb mark on the application, the apology is accepted and the notice is discharged. In view above, the Criminal Appeal No. 384 of 2025 is dismissed as withdrawn. Cr. Appeal No. 100 of 2025 List for hearing in due course. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 21st July, 2026(ravinder)

Basheer Mohammad vs State of H.P. a/w connected appeal. Cr. Appeal No. 384 of 2025 and Cr. Apeal No. 100 of 2025 Cr. Appeal No. 384 of 2025 21.07.2026. Present: Mr. Arjun Lall, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Jitender K.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondent/State. Cr. Appeal No. 100 of 2025 None for the appellant. Mr. Jitender K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for the respondent/State. Cr. Appeal No. 384 of 2025 A reply has been filed on behalf of the appellant tendering unconditional apology and submitting that the son of appellant had engaged another counsel for filing of the appeal, however, the appellant being illiterate had applied for legal aid. The two appeals were filed because of this confusion and now the appellant wants to withdraw the Criminal Appeal No. 384 of 2025 and wants to pursue Criminal Appeal No.100 of 2025. Considering the fact that two appeals were filed due to the miscommunication and the plea of the appellant that he is illiterate is duly supported by the fact that he has put the thumb mark on the application, the apology is accepted and the notice is discharged. In view above, the Criminal Appeal No. 384 of 2025 is dismissed as withdrawn. Cr. Appeal No. 100 of 2025 List for hearing in due course. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 21st July, 2026(ravinder)