STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. GULABSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point arising in the above appeal, filed by the State, is whether the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded, who, on Aug. 9, 1974, convicted the accused No. 1 in Sessions Case No. 62 of 1974, under Section. 326, and sentenced him to suffer Rule . 1. for two years, was right in acquitting him and the other three accused who are respondents in the above appeal, who were convicted under Section. 323 and acquitted of the offence under Section 307 read with Section. 34 of the I.P.C. and were given the benefit of Section. 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, that is, in acquitting accused No. 1 of the charge under Section 307 and accused Nos. 2 to 4 of the charge under 307 read with Section. 34 I.P.C.

(2.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge has given reasons in para. 23 of his judgment. The said reasons are attacked in the above appeal filed by the State. It must be noted that the conviction of accused No. 1 is challenged by him by filing Criminal Appeal No. 931 of 1974 and as the Advocate for the accused in that case did not appear when the case was called out, yesterday or even today after it was part-heard, we have adjourned the hearing of that case without expressing any of our views on the conviction of accused No. 1 which is challenged in that appeal. That appeal is adjourned for hearing to Feb. 21, 1978. But there is no reason for keeping back the above appeal filed by the State, which, according to us, is without any substance, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. The rest of the accused have not challenged their conviction under Section. 323, or the order under Section. 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, by filing an appeal.

(3.) We proceed to decide the above appeal filed by the State on the assumption that we are not called upon at present to decide whether the conviction of accused Nos. 1 and 2 to 4 is right in the facts and circumstances of the case. We are only concerned with the question whether the acquittal of the accused under Section, 307 and Section. 307 read with Section. 34 is right,