Short Note : 1. The prosecution case is this : On 8-2-75, at about 3 a.m., a dacoity was committed at the house of Hiralal (P.W. 2). Smt. Shyamkalibai is the wife of Chandrapatilal (P.W.6). Shakuntalabai (P.W.4) is the wife of Hazarilal (P.W. 5) who is the son of Hiralal (P.W.2). The dacoits who raided the house of Hiralal, were 13 in number and were armed with deadly weapons like axe, pistol, etc. They robbed the women-folk of the ornaments which they were wearing and took away their valuables, cash, a sword and a gun etc. Hiralal (P.W. 2) went to the police station and lodged the F.I.R. Ex. P-1 at 5-30 p. m., the same day. Jawaharlal (P.W.1) and others recognised the appellant as one of the dacoits, because few days prior to the dacoity, the appellant, along with one Babula Khan, had visited the house of Hiralal (P.W. 2) to demand a loan from one Kol. They had stayed during the day, had cooked food there and left in the morning. Held: The prosecution evidence conclusively established that the appellant Ramchandra, with a pistol, participated in the dacoity at the house of Hiralal (P.W.2). He was known to the prosecution witnesses and had also caused in juries to Jawaharlal. He had played an important role in the affair and since he was previously known, there could be no mistake in identifying him in the torch light and the mention of his name in the F.I.R., lends corroboration to the version of the prosecution witnesses. The wrong mention of village in the F.I.R., is explained by the evidence of Hazailal who stated that the appellant himself had given out the name of his village as Kapari. In view of the above, the lower Court rightly held that the appellant had committed dacoity at the house of Hiralal and was, at that time, using a deadly weapon, i.e. a pistol. His conviction under section 395/397 I.P.C., is in order. The sentence of 7 years rigorous imprisonment appears to be the minimum prescribed for such an offence under law. Appeal dismissed.