HARIHAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C. A. Rahim, J.- This Revision has been directed against the judgment and order of Sessions Judge, Ghazipur, dated 27-6- 1984 in Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 1984. By that judgment he convicted the appellant under Section 3231. P. C. and sen tenced to suffer R. I. for six months.

(2.) AN Appeal was preferred before the Sessions Judge, Ghazipur, against the con viction and sentence passed by the IVth Munsif Magistrate, Ghazipur, on 30-1-1984 under Section 332 I. P. C. and sentenced to suffer R. I. for one year.

(3.) SRI S. K. Verma, learned counsel ap pearing for the appellant, has submitted that both the eye witnesses having not cor roborated the prosecution story, the solitary statement of P. W. 1 (complainant) should not be believed. He has submitted that there was doubt as regards the date of permission the written report which was at first dated 3-6-1980 and thereafter altered to 4-6-1980. So existence of the said report was He has also submitted that both the courts below did not consider the provision of Section 360 Cr. P. C. and convicted the appellant illegally.