KESHAN PAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate for the State were heard and material available on record has been perused. Instant criminal revision has been preferred against the conviction of the revisionists in criminal case No. 1075 of 2000 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. V, Unnao dated 24.8.2001 whereby the revisionists were convicted for the offence under Sections 323/34, 324/34, 326/34 and 504 IPC. Following sentences were imposed on the revisionist.

(2.) Said conviction was challenged in criminal appeal No. 42 of 2001 and Sessions Judge, Unnao in Criminal Appeal No. 42 of 2001 vide his judgment dated 27.11.2001 dismissed the appeal, hence the instant revision.

(3.) Only submission of learned counsel for the revisionists is that in this case grievous injury which was alleged to be sustained by the injured was not the result of any deadly weapon or sharp edged weapon, particularly knife as alleged in the instant case. Such injury (injury No. 9) was caused by hard and blunt object and therefore, the revisionists were wrongly convicted for the offence under Section 326/34 IPC. Further submission would be that all the other injuries sustained by the injured were simple in nature.