DIWAKAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PARMESHWAR Dayal, J. This revision arises out of the order of conviction and sentence, passed by the two lower Courts against the revisionist, finally convicting and sentencing him under Section 324,i. P. C. to (2) years' rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) THE prosecution case, briefly stated, has been that on 6-12-1981 at about 7 a. m. , the revisionist and two others assaulted the informant, Raj Kumar Shukla by means of Farsha, Ballam and Lathi. On an intervention by others, they left the injured and went away. He lodged F. I. R. on the same day at 11. 30 a. m. on which basis a case was registered and investigation followed. THE injury report indicated that he received injuries which could possibly be caused by means of Farsha, Ballam and Lathis. He was prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 323/34, 325/34 and 324,i. P. C. THE trial Court convicted and sentenced him under all the aforesaid Sections. THE appellate Court set aside his conviction and sentence under Sections 323/34 and 325/34,i. P. C. and upheld his conviction under Section 324,i. P. C. THE co-accused of the revisionist, namely, Udhava, was released on probation. THE third accused was not prosecuted.