M.R. Shah, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 16.01.2006 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur in Sessions Case No. 31 of 2002, by which learned trial Court has acquitted original accused No. 1 for the offences punishable under sections 307, 323, 324 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 27(1) of the Indian Arms Act, however, convicted original accused No. 1 for the offence punishable under section 325 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of rupees one thousand, in default to undergo further three months simple imprisonment; and has acquitted original accused No. 2 for the offences under sections 307, 34, 232, 324 of the IPC and section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and section 27(1) of the Indian Arms Act, the State has preferred the present appeal under section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

2. At the outset it is required to be noted that as such the conviction of original accused No. 1 for the offence under section 325 of the IPC for having caus