MD. TAHIR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN this revision application was taken up, no body appears from the side of the respondent Nos. 6 and 7, though office notes dated 8 -4 -1997 shows that notice had been validly served upon them and the daily cause list also shows the name of Mr. S.N. Sinha as the Advocate for them. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances, in the absence of the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 6 and 7, this revision is being heard.

(2.) LOWER Court records have been received and perused, Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner -revisionist and no body appears from the side of the State.

(3.) THE informant -revisionist had challenged the order of sentence awarded by the learned Magistrate on the ground that in the face of the admitted earlier conviction, the benefit under Section 360(3) Cr. P.C. could not have been extended to irshad Ansari and Khurshid Ansari.