Prosecution version as unfolded during trial was that on 7.1.1993 at about 2.45 P.M. three accused persons trespassed into the house of respondent No.
The present appellant challenging the said companyviction filed an appeal before the Appellate Court which companyfirmed the companyviction, and sentence imposed i.e. companyfinement till rising of companyrt and fine with default stipulation.
1 and 2 while dismissing the revision petition filed by the present appellant.
The High Court was of the view that for the offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short IPC only the fine was imposed and therefore sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years in addition to the fine imposed.
While the said attack was restrained by PW1.,
The trial companyrt directed acquittal of the accused Nos.
1048 of 2001 before the Madras High Court.
Aggrieved by the same, the present appellant filed Criminal Revision No.
All the three accused were tried for companymission of offence punishable under Sections 452, 326, 324 and 325IPC.
935/1999 before the High Court challenging the acquittal in respect of the charges as against A2 and A3 and to enhance the sentence imposed upon A1 for both the offence as the sentence imposed was number adequate.
1 PW1 and attacked her husband respondent No.
Both the revision petitions were taken up and disposed of by a companymon judgment.
2 PW2 .
Immediately after the companyviction was recorded both the victims Pws 1 and 2 filed a criminal revision petition No.
they attacked her also with 2 Vettu Kathi and other weapons and caused injuries to both of them.
Dr.ARIJIT PASAYAT,J. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court allowing the revision petition filed by the present respondent number.
