JUDGMENT - R.A. JAHAGIRDAR, J.:---The petitioner, hereinafter referred to as "the accused" has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of Nasik in Sessions Case No. 76 of 1981 for offences punishable under sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. He has also been convicted for the offence punishable under section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, though no separate sentence was awarded for the same. Technically, this order of conviction under section 363 of the Indian Penal Code is incorrect because the offence under section 366 is a larger one embracing the offence under section 363. Along with the accused another person named Sulbha was also put up for trial for offences punishable under the same sections, but read with section 34. She has, however, been acquitted. The order of the learned Sessions Judge convicting the accused and acquitting the other accused, Sulbha is of 23rd of October, 1981.

2. Aggrieved by the said order of conviction, the accused has preferred Criminal Revision Application No. 780 of 1981 because the sentence awarded by the learned Sessions Judge is not appealable. This Court has issued a notice of enhancement, which is being treated as Criminal Revi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document