Short Note : 1. The learned Additional Sessions Judge though finding both the appellants not guilty of offences charged (Punishable under Section 395 read with Section 397 IPC) acquitted them of those offences, but finding them guilty of offence punishable under section 324 IPC, read with section 34 IPC, has sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for two years. 2. The appellants had faced their trials for the offence punishable under section 395 read with section 397 IPC, which essentially is the offence against property and falls under Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, they could not have been in the absence of a charge under section 324 IPC found guilty of offence punishable under section 324, IPC which essentially is an offence affecting the human body and falling under a separate Chapter XVI of the Indian Penal Code. The offence punishable under section 324 IPC, (either independently or with the help of section 34 IPC) is not a minor offence or offences punishable under section 395 read with section 397 IPC. That being so, the appellants could not have been convicted of an offence with which they were not charged. Rameshwar and Another vs. Emperor, AIR 1928 Oudh. 373, distinguishing the decision in Begu and Others vs. Emperor, AIR 1925 PC 130 . 3. This, however, is not the only ground for allowing this appeal. The evidence regarding the alleged identification of the two appellants at the identification parade held by Ramlochansingh (PW-8) is most doubtful. The first information report (Ex.P-1) does not contain anything regarding the peculiarities like complexion, voice, gait, height, clothes and the like associated with the two appellants at the time of alleged commission of dacoity or attempted dacoity. Nor, is there any other evidence regarding the concerned witnesses Ramnihorsingh (PW-3), Jagat Deo Singh (PW-4) and Mandhirsingh (PW-5) having ever described any of the peculiarities regarding the features of the appellants to anyone before their identification in the Jail at Rewa on 9.1.1974. 4. It has to be remembered that the event had taken place almost at midnight in a village without any artificial light and the whole event had concluded within a very short time. 4. It has to be remembered that the event had taken place almost at midnight in a village without any artificial light and the whole event had concluded within a very short time. It is hard to conceive that these witnesses could have in those fleeing moments particularly when the two of them Ramnihorsingh (PW-3) and Jagat Deo Singh had themselves been injured, recognized their assailants particularly after an interval of about two months. It is significant that while identifying before Ramlochansingh (PW-8) neither of these witnesses had specified the reason for his identifying the appellants. From the evidence of Ramnihorsingh (PW-3) in the cross-examination there is a clear admission that the Station Officer Pahadsingh (PW-11) had given this witness the information that the two appellants had already been arrested and were confined in a police station. He even admits that he in the company of the other two witnesses Jagat Deo Singh and Mandhirsingh had gone to the police station. It is, therefore, likely as explained by the appellants that these witnesses had already seen them in the police station. If that was so, the identification parade later on arranged becomes only a farce. AIR 1928 Oudh. 372, relied on. Appeal allowed.