NARAIN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DR. Maithli Sharan, J. This is an appeal filed by two of the four accused persons who were tried by the VI Addi tional Sessions Judge, Unnao in S. T No. 297 of 1982 for the offences under Sections 324/323/307,1. P. C.

(2.) LEARNED Additional Sessions Judge, Unnao on appraisal of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, came to the conclusion that no case under Section 307, I. P. C. was made out. He convicted accused Dhani and Narain for the offence under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34, I. P. C. He also convicted accused Parmeshwar and Barjor. Accused Parmeshwar and Barjor were below 21 years, hence they were given benefit of Section 4 of Proba tion Act and were ordered to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 2,000/- with two sureties of like amount for being of good conduct for a period of one year. However, accused Narain was convicted for the of fence under Section 324, I. P. C. and sen tenced to undergo R. I. for two years and for his conviction under Section 323 read with Section 34, I. P. C. he was sentenced to undergo R. I. for one year. Accused Dhani who was convicted under Sections 323 and 324, I. P. C. read with Section 34, I. P. C. was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year on each of these two counts. Thus, these two convicted accused persons Narain and Dhani have preferred this appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.