Short Note : Now, coming to the case against applicant No.2 Harji, this Court is of the view that his conviction and sentence under section 326/34 IPC cannot be sustained. It is true that he was all along with the applicant No.1 Prahlad and had come to the field second time being armed with a Lohangi. But after getting the warning from the complainant Jarat Khan for not coming to the field again when the applicant No.1 prahlad had started returning from the field carrying the bundle of Juwar crop the applicant No.2 Harji could not have anticipated that the applicant No.1 Prahlad would all of a sudden drop the bundle of crop from his head and strike a Pharsi blow to complainant Jarat Khan. There was, therefore, no meeting of mind of the two applicants for causing grievous hurt to the complainant Jarat Khan. It is said that the applicant No.2 Harji attempted to assault Usuf Khan, but he has not been charged for that offence. Therefore, the applicant No.2 Harji cannot be convicted for the Act of the applicant No.1 Prahlad in causing grievous hurt to the complainant Jarat Khan by means of a Pharsi. This Court is, therefore, of the view that the applicant No.2 must be acquitted of the charge under section 326/34 IPC. Revision partly allowed.