VADDYA, J. :- 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. 52 of 1974, under S. 326, and sentenced him to suffer R. I. for two years, was right in acquitting him and the other three accused who are respondents in the above appeal, who were convicted under S. 323 and acquitted of the offence under S. 307 read with S. 34 of the I.P.C. and were given the benefit of S. 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 S. 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 vi