JUDGMENT 1. In our opinion this rule must be made absolute. Having regard to the rulings of this Court, we think that the contentions raised by the learned vakil for the Crown are unsustainable. It seems to us on the authority of the case of Sabir v. Queen-Empress I. L. R. 22 Cal. 276 (1894), that it must be shown that each individual person charged under sec. 148 was himself armed. Then, in regard to sec 149, we think it is sufficient to say that it is not shown that the wound on Wahed Ali was the natural result of the common enterprise in which these persons were engaged. The result was obviously one which was altogether unexpected by the persons who entered the house for the purpose of bringing Jubbar Ali out. We are further of opinion that the view which was pressed upon us by the learned vakil for the Crown as to the gravity of the case is one to which we ought not properly give effect. What actually appears to have happened is that the so-called principal accused in respect of whom there is nothing to show that he was armed merely directed three of his followers to enter the house of Jubbar Ali and bring him out. These persons were not armed and apparently there was no intention whatsoever on their part to do Jubbar Ali any injury. In the course of the scuffle which ensued, after three men had entered the house, the wound was inflicted on Wahed Ali by one of them who is not before the Court. The result is, we think, that the conviction of the accused must be varied from one under sec. 148 to one under sec. 147, I. P. C. The conviction under sec. 324 read with sec. 149 must be set aside and the sentence reduced to six months' rigorous imprisonment. The order of fine imposed on the first Petitioner Harendra Chandra Sarkar will stand.