Short Note : 1. In this appeal the State of Madhya Pradesh has challenged the order of acquittal of the respondent Gopal under section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Held: From the Medical evidence it is established beyond doubt that Vijaykumar suffered from chilli powder at the hands of the respondent who had snatched away the bag from his hand containing cash and was later on over powered. This fact is further corroborated by the first information report (Ex.P-l) in which Vijaykumar (PW 1) mentioned that the respondent had thrown chilli powder on his face. He has also mentioned in the first information report (Ex P 1) that the respondent had threatened him that he will shoot him with a pistol. All these facts conclusively established that the respondent had snatched away the bag containing money under show of force. 3. Besided the evidence of Vijaykumar (PW 1) regarding use of force, there is further evidence to establish this fact. Badriprasad (PW 2) WdS iGformed immediately after the incident that the respondent had thrown chilli powder in his eyes and had snatched away the hag. Bholaram (PW 3) stated that the eyes of Vijaykumar (PW 1) were red and he told him that the respo1dent had snatched away the bag from him, 4. Raghuraj Prasad Pandey (PW 7) stated that Vijaykumar told him that the respondent had thrown chilli powder in his eyes and had threatened to shoot him. Mithuram (PW 9) had seen the respondent running away with a bag in his hand. 5. There is thus the evidence that Vijaykumar (PW 1) immediately after the incident was found with his eyes being red and also informing more than one person that the respondent had thrown chilli powder in his eyes and had threatened to shoot him. Show of force is proved by the seizure of a toy pistol from the possession of the respondent. There is no explanation offered by the respondent for possession of the pistol and his defence has been disbelieved by the, Additional Sessions Judge. In face of such overwhelming evidence, the reasonings of the Additional Sessions Judge in disbelieving the prosecution version of show force is definitely absurd and erroneous, The order of acquittal of the respondent under section 392 of the Indian Penal Code is clearly unwarranted and he deserves to be convicted under section 392. 6. In face of such overwhelming evidence, the reasonings of the Additional Sessions Judge in disbelieving the prosecution version of show force is definitely absurd and erroneous, The order of acquittal of the respondent under section 392 of the Indian Penal Code is clearly unwarranted and he deserves to be convicted under section 392. 6. For the reasons given above, the appeal of the State of Madhya Pradesh succeeds and is allowed. The conviction of the respondent Gopal under section 379 of the Indian Penal Code is converted one under sect ion 392. of the Indian Penal Code and he is convicted under that section. Jail sentence of two years is treated as sufficient punishment for that offence and, therefore, no further imprisonment is essential on the facts and circumstances of the case. Besides, he is sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 200 or in default, to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. Appeal allowed.