- (1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 14-11-1980 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Basti convicting the ap pellants under Section 307/34,1. P. C. and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years.
(2.) HEARD Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Ad ditional Government Advocate. The learned counsel for the appel lants contended that even if the prosecu tion case is accepted it cannot be said that the accused were guilty of offence punish able under Section 307, I. P. C. He con tended that none of the injuries caused to the victims could be said to be serious much less dangerous to life. Rohitlal on medical examination was found to contain one lacerated wound which was only muscle deep besides three linear abrasions and a traumatic swelling. The injuries No. 1 and 5 were kept under observation. The other injuries were reported to be simple. The prosecution has not proved the X-ray report to indicate that either injury No. l or injury No. 5 was grievous.
(3.) IT is true that injury No. 1 was caused on the chest but considering the nature of the injury, specially when it was only 1 cm. x 0. 5 cm. x muscle deep, it cannot be said to be dangerous to life. The learned Additional Govern ment Advocate contended that since the abrasion could be caused by spear the necessary inference is that these injuries were serious and dangerous to life. I do not find any force in this contention. In my opinion, the accused could not be con victed under Section 307/34, I. P. C.;