JUDGMENT/ORDER : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 08.11.2007, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 43 of 2003, whereby the respondents (hereinafter referred to as the "accused persons") have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 302, 307, 341 and 148 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, the State of Himachal Pradesh has preferred this appeal on the grounds, inter-alia, that learned trial Court has not only failed to view the evidence produced by the prosecution in its right perspective but also set unrealistic standards to evaluate the same. 2. The reasoning as given by learned trial Court for recording of findings of acquittal are manifestly unreasonable and unsustainable in the eyes of law and the evidence qua occurrence as has come on record by way of the eye witnesses count, has been erroneously discarded for untenable reasons. It is pointed out that PW-1 Goverdhan Singh, PW-2 Roshan Lal, PW-3 Hem Raj, PW-5 Sunil Kumar, PW-6 Hira Singh and PW-8 Dharam Pal, have categorically stated that it is the accused persons who firstly assaulted PW-2 Roshan Lal and when deceased Kaul Ram came to his rescue, accused Jai Chand inflicted bat blow on his head and as a result thereof, he felldown and became unconscious. Lateron, he succumbed to the injuries so received on the way to Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla, for treatment. Such evidence could have not been ignored. The witnesses had been watching the cricket tournament w.e.f. 15.01.2003 to 19.01.2003 and as such had an occasion to identify the accused persons, none-else, but the members of Jahu team. Otherwise also, the witnesses, particularly the eye witnesses, were not expected to know the names of all the accused persons nor is there any legal requirement or rule of prudence that the witnesses must know the names of the accused persons also. Learned trial Court, as such, has erred in law while recording the findings that for want of identification parade and the names of the accused persons were not mentioned in the FIR, they could have not been connected with the commission of the offence. The witnesses, on the other hand, have identified accused Subhash Chand, Vicky, Inder Singh and Jai Chand, while in the witness-box and during the course of recording their statements in the Court. The witnesses, on the other hand, have identified accused Subhash Chand, Vicky, Inder Singh and Jai Chand, while in the witness-box and during the course of recording their statements in the Court. The identity of the accused persons even stands established from the testimonies of hostile witnesses, i.e. PW-3 Hem Raj and PW-5 Sunil Kumar. Therefore, learned trial Court has committed illegality while rejecting the evidence as has come on record from the testimony of eye witnesses by giving undue weightage to minor contradictions and omission occurred in the prosecution evidence. The prosecution case that it is accused Subhash Chand who firstly mounted on the stage, when PW-2 Roshan Lal was winding up the goods lying there and started beating the said witness and the remaining accused joined him subsequently in administering beating, is satisfactorily proved on record, however, erroneously brushed burst aside. The fatal injury inflicted on the head of deceased Kaul Ram by accused Jai Chand, is also established on record from the testimonies of eye witnesses. The accused persons, allegedly members of Jahu team, had motive to beat PW-2 Roshan Lal and kill deceased Kaul Ram as they lost the cricket match. The findings to the contrary are also stated to be wrong. The impugned judgment, as such, has been sought to be quashed and set aside. 3. The prosecution case as disclosed from the record, in a nut shell, is that FIR Ext. PW-20/C came to be lodged against the accused persons at the instance of PW-1 Goverdhan Singh with the allegation that a cricket tournament was organized at Village Kofta, Tehsil Nankhari, District Shimla, w.e.f. 15.01.2003 to 19.01.2003. Around twenty cricket teams participated in this tournament. The final match was played on 19.01.2003 between the teams of Kalbog and Jahu. The team of Kalbog was successful in the match and the Jahu team lost the match. On that day around 06.00 p.m., when the players and visitors left the playground, PW-2 Roshan lal started collecting mike and other articles lying on the stage. About 5-6 players of Jahu team climbed up and came on the stage. They started snatching and damaging the articles lying on the stage. PW-2 Roshan Lal tried to stop them and as a result thereof, they started giving kick and fist blows to Roshan Lal. The occurrence was witnessed by his brother Kaul Ram (since dead). About 5-6 players of Jahu team climbed up and came on the stage. They started snatching and damaging the articles lying on the stage. PW-2 Roshan Lal tried to stop them and as a result thereof, they started giving kick and fist blows to Roshan Lal. The occurrence was witnessed by his brother Kaul Ram (since dead). The deceased Kaul Ram who was in his house situated at that place itself, rushed towards the stage to save his brother PW-2 Roshan Lal. He, however, was manhandled by the offending members of Jahu team. They administered kick and fist blows to deceased Kaul Ram. One of the accused (Jai Chand) dealt one blow with cricket bat on the head of deceased Kaul Ram and as a result thereof, he fell-down. He was brought to MGMSC, Khaneri, for treatment in an unconscious condition. On the statement of PW-1 Goverdhan Singh Ext. PW-1/A, a case under Section 341, 323, 147, 148 & 149 of the Indian Penal Code, was registered vide FIR Ext. PW-20/C, in Police Station Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla. 4. Injured Roshan Lal and Kaul Ram, both were medically examined at MGMSC, Khaneri. They both were referred to Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla, for treatment. Deceased Kaul Ram expired during the intervening night of 20.01.2003 and 21.01.2003 due to the injuries he suffered in this occurrence and as a result thereof, a case for the commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, was also registered against the accused persons. 5. The police during the course of investigation has prepared the inquest papers Ext. PW-1/B. The application Ext. PW-1/C was submitted to the Medical Officer with a prayer to conduct the post mortem of the dead body. The post mortem report is Ext. PW-17/A. The disclosure statement allegedly made by accused Jai Chand qua recovery of bat, is Ext. PW-10/A. The bat Ext. P-1 was recovered subsequently and the demarcation of the place of recovery is Ext. PW-11/B. The police has also taken into possession one jacket and one pant of PW-2 Roshan Lal vide recovery memo Ext. PW-9/A and the blood stained earth vide recovery memo Ext. PW-14/A. The Patwari Halqa has prepared the Tatima of the place of occurrence Ext. PW-15/A and also submitted the copy of Jamabandi Ext. PW-15/B & Ext. PW-11/B. The police has also taken into possession one jacket and one pant of PW-2 Roshan Lal vide recovery memo Ext. PW-9/A and the blood stained earth vide recovery memo Ext. PW-14/A. The Patwari Halqa has prepared the Tatima of the place of occurrence Ext. PW-15/A and also submitted the copy of Jamabandi Ext. PW-15/B & Ext. PW-15/C. The photographs of the dead body were also taken and added in the police file. According to the opinion of PW-17 Dr. Piyush Kapila Ext. PW-17/A, the deceased Kaul Ram died as a result of syncope and asphyxia secondary to antemortem head injury. The report of Chemical Examiner Ext. PA, was also received. 6. On the completion of the investigation, report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed against the accused persons. Learned trial Judge has framed charge under Section 147 read with Section 149 IPC, under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC, under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC, under Section 341 read with Section 149 IPC and under Section 148 read with Section 149 IPC, against the accused persons. They, however, not pleaded guilty to the charge and claimed trial. 7. The prosecution was called upon to produce evidence in order to sustain the charge so framed against the accused persons. The material prosecution witnesses are PW-1 Goverdhan Singh, PW-2 Roshan Lal, PW-3 Hem Raj, PW-4 Balbir Singh, PW-5 Sunil Kumar, PW-6 Hira Singh, PW-7 Madan Singh, PW-8 Dharam Pal and PW-13 Ram Singh, allegedly the eye witnesses to the occurrence. The remaining prosecution witnesses are PW-9 Constable Krishan Lal; PW-10 Sudhanshu Kapoor, the attesting witness to disclosure statement Ext. PW10/A; PW-11 Jawala Dass, Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Krangla, a witness to sketch of cricket bat Ext. PW-11/A and recovery memo Ext. PW-11/B. PW-12 Dr. M.L. Kashyap has examined deceased kaul Ram and PW-2 Roshan Lal in MGMSC Khaneri. They were referred by him to Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla. PW-14 Jawala Dass is a witness to the recovery of blood stained earth from the place of occurrence vide recovery memo Ext. PW-14/A and blood stained pieces of jackets vide recovery memo Ext. PW-14/B. PW-15 Gurdev Singh is Patwari, Patwar Circle Delath, who had prepared the Tatima Ext. PW-15/A and also submitted the copy of Jamabandi Ext. PW 15/B and Ext. PW-14/A and blood stained pieces of jackets vide recovery memo Ext. PW-14/B. PW-15 Gurdev Singh is Patwari, Patwar Circle Delath, who had prepared the Tatima Ext. PW-15/A and also submitted the copy of Jamabandi Ext. PW 15/B and Ext. PW-15/C as well as prepared the spot report Ext. PW-15/D. PW-16 Devinder Mehta, was also a spectator to the tournament, however, according to him, he was not present at the time of occurrence having already left the place after the match between Jahu team and Kalwog team was over. PW-17 Dr. Piyush Kapila, has given the opinion Ext. PW-17/C on the request made by the police vide application Ext. PW-17/B. PW18 Dr. Jitender Kochhar, Medical Officer, MGMSC, Khaneri, has examined accused Parveen Kumar and issued Medico Legal Certificate Ext. PW-18/A. PW-19 HC Diwan Chand and PW-20 HC Devi Singh, have partly investigated the case. PW-21 Inspector Sangat Ram Negi, the then Additional S.H.O., Police Station, Rampur, was the Investigating Officer of this case, whereas PW-20 HC Devi Singh, PW-22 HC Madan Singh and PW-23 Constable Arish Sharma, also remained associated during the investigation of the case. PW-24 Dr. Jagdish Gupta, has medically examined PW-2 Roshan Lal vide treatment summary Ext. PW-24/A, whereas PW-25 Sub Inspector Balwant Singh has also investigated the case partly. PW-26 HHC Pradeep Kumar had brought three parcels from the spot and deposited the same in the Police Station with MHC Madan Singh in safe custody. 8. On the other hand, all the accused in their statements recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have admitted that cricket tournament was held in January, 2003 at Kofta ground and that twenty teams had participated in the said tournament. It is also admitted that final match was played between Jahu and Kalbog teams, however, it is denied that they lost the match. Rest of the prosecution case has either been denied being wrong or for want of knowledge. They expressed their ignorance as to why the prosecution witnesses have deposed against them. In their defence, they opted for not producing any evidence. 9. Rest of the prosecution case has either been denied being wrong or for want of knowledge. They expressed their ignorance as to why the prosecution witnesses have deposed against them. In their defence, they opted for not producing any evidence. 9. Learned trial Judge, on appreciation of the entire evidence available on record and hearing learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned defence counsel, has arrived at a conclusion that no case for the commission of alleged offences is made out against either of the accused and as such, they have been acquitted of the charge framed against each of them. 10. Learned Additional Advocate General, has vehemently argued that cogent and reliable evidence as has come on record by way of the testimonies of the material prosecution witnesses, speaks in plenty that it is the accused persons who firstly administered kick and fist blows to PW-2 Roshan Lal. When his brother deceased Kaul Ram came to his rescue, he was also meted out the same treatment and accused Jai Chand has administered fatal blow with cricket bat Ext. P-1 on his head. Said deceased Kaul Ram succumbed to the injuries so received by him on the way to Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla, for treatment. All the accused, as such, have been sought to be convicted and sentenced for the commission of the said offence they allegedly committed. 11. However, learned defence counsel, has argued with all vehemence that what to speak of cogent and reliable evidence, the present is a case of no evidence against the accused persons and as such, they have rightly been acquitted by learned trial Court. It has, thus, been urged that the impugned judgment, being legally and factually sustainable, call for no interference by this Court in the present appeal. 12. The rival contentions have to be considered in the light of the evidence available on record. However, before that it is desirable to take note of the reasons recorded by learned trial Judge, while acquitting the accused persons of the charge framed against each of them. The same reads as follows : "I have given considerable deep thought to the contentions of the learned P. P. and the learned counsel for the accused. In my opinion, the prosecution has not been able to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt due to the following reasons : 1. The same reads as follows : "I have given considerable deep thought to the contentions of the learned P. P. and the learned counsel for the accused. In my opinion, the prosecution has not been able to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt due to the following reasons : 1. Non-mention of names of the accused persons in the FIR; 2. Non-mention of the names of the players of Jahu team which were available with the Organizers of the tournament; 3. Non-holding of the test identification parade; 4. Material contradictions in the statements of the eye witnesses; and 5. Want of motive/reason for commission of the offences. " 13. Whether learned trial Judge is justified in recording the findings of acquittal in this case or not, takes us to the evidence available on record. PW-1 Goverdhan Singh, is the complainant. As a matter of fact, it is he who lodged the FIR and set the machinery in motion. He has not disclosed the name of either of the accused persons in the FIR Ext. PW-20/C and rather referred them as the Members of Jahu Cricket Team. He has also not said that it is accused Subhash Chand who first climbed up to the stage and started beating PW-2 Roshan Lal with kick and fist blows. No doubt, as per his version, when deceased Kaul Ram came to the rescue of PW-2 Roshan Lal, he was also given beating by accused Jai Chand and his coaccused, including inflicting of fatal blows with cricket bat Ext. P1 on his head by said accused Jai Chand. Interestingly enough, prior to 19.01.2003 (the day of occurrence), he was not knowing the names of either of the accused irrespective of he had seen the matches throughout, i.e. w.e.f. 15.01.2003 to 19.01.2003. In the FIR Ext. PW-20/C, he did not disclose the name of accused Jai Chand. Being so, it can reasonably be believed that he acquired the knowledge qua the name of said accused Jai Chand lateron, may be from the Members of the Committee which has organized the tournament. Therefore, it can not be believed by any stretch of imagination that the members who allegedly started beating PW-2 Roshan Lal and thereafter administered beating to deceased Kaul Ram, were none-else but the accused persons alone. His testimony, as such, has rightly been discarded by learned trial Judge. 14. Therefore, it can not be believed by any stretch of imagination that the members who allegedly started beating PW-2 Roshan Lal and thereafter administered beating to deceased Kaul Ram, were none-else but the accused persons alone. His testimony, as such, has rightly been discarded by learned trial Judge. 14. As per the version of another material witness PW-2 Roshan Lal, accused Subhash Chand climbed up and came on the stage when he was collecting mike system and other goods lying there. The said accused started damaging goods lying there and on being asked not to do so, he administered kick and fist blows to him. He cried for help and PW-13 Ram Singh as well as other Members of Cricket Club, rushed and came to his rescue. As per his further version, the accused had attacked deceased Kaul Ram thereafter and murdered him. Now, if his testimony in cross-examination is seen, he has admitted the suggestion that he did not notice any of the accused causing hurt to deceased Kaul Ram. Out of eleven Members of Jahu Team, he was only knowing the names of two. He did not disclose the names of the Members of Jahu Team to the police during the course of investigation. He being the injured witness and that too having not seen as to which accused caused hurt and inflicted fatal bat blow on the person of deceased Kaul Ram, itself speaks in plenty about the credibility of his testimony. Therefore, the evidence as has come on record by way of testimony of PW-2 Roshan Lal, is also not suggestive of that it is the accused persons who alone were the assailants and none-else. 15. If coming to the testimonies of PW-3 Hem Raj, PW-4 Balbir Singh and PW-5 Sunil Kumar, the so called eye witnesses, they have not supported the prosecution case and rather were declared hostile as well as allowed to be cross-examined by the Public Prosecutor. As per the version of PW-3 Hem Raj, accused Subhash Chand mounted on the stage and he as well as other persons started quarrelling with PW-2 Roshan Lal. They administered beating also to said PW-2 Roshan Lal. According to him, he left for his house and came to know lateron that deceased Kaul Ram had received injury on his head caused by one of the Members of Jahu Team. They administered beating also to said PW-2 Roshan Lal. According to him, he left for his house and came to know lateron that deceased Kaul Ram had received injury on his head caused by one of the Members of Jahu Team. During his cross examination conducted on behalf of the prosecution, nothing material landing support to its case, could be elicited. PW-4 Balbir Singh, tells us that though on hearing cries of Ram Singh for life, he rushed to the stage, however, inflicted injury by someone from his back side. Therefore, it was not known to him as to who had caused injuries to PW-2 Roshan Lal and deceased Kaul Ram. Nothing material landing support to the prosecution case even could be elicited from the cross-examination of this witness also. PW-5 Sunil Kumar though tells us that accused Subhash Chand had administered beating to PW-2 Roshan Lal, however, expressed his ignorance as to who had caused hurt to deceased Kaul Ram. He expressed his ignorance that it is accused Jai Chand, armed with cricket bat, caused hurt to deceased Kaul Ram. True it is that in his cross-examination conducted on behalf of the prosecution, he has admitted that accused Jai Chand was armed with cricket bat and he inflicted one blow therewith on the head of deceased Kaul Ram, however, stated in the same breath that accused Jai Chand did not cause hurt to deceased Kaul Ram instead the said accused caused hurt with cricket bat to PW-2 Roshan Lal, whereas other accused caused hurt to PW-2 Roshan Lal with fist blows. Therefore, the version of PW-5, in his examination-in-chief and also in cross-examination, lead to the only conclusion that he had not seen accused Jai Chand having dealt with bat blow on the head of deceased Kaul Ram. As per his further version though he had stated during the course of investigation that accused Jai Chand had inflicted cricket bat blow on the head of deceased Kaul Ram, however, as per his further version he did so out of fear. Also that the public of the area asked him to make such statement against accused Jai Chand. The testimony of this witness, therefore, is not suggestive of that it is accused persons alone who administered beating to PW-2 Roshan Lal and accused Jai Chand inflicted fatal blow on the head of deceased Kaul Ram with bat Ext. P-1. Also that the public of the area asked him to make such statement against accused Jai Chand. The testimony of this witness, therefore, is not suggestive of that it is accused persons alone who administered beating to PW-2 Roshan Lal and accused Jai Chand inflicted fatal blow on the head of deceased Kaul Ram with bat Ext. P-1. PW-6 Hira Singh is the brother of deceased Kaul Ram. He has supported the prosecution case qua injury on the head of deceased Kaul Ram inflicted by accused Jai Chand with cricket bat and also that other accused persons had administered kick and fist blows to deceased Kaul Ram and also PW-2 Roshan Lal. However, when cross-examined, he has also admitted that the Members of Jahu Team, were known to him and he disclosed their names to the police after due consultation with the Members of the Committee which had organized the tournament, meaning thereby that PW-6 Hira Singh had disclosed the names of all the accused persons to the police on the basis of information he received from the Members of Tournament Committee. Interestingly enough, as per the investigation conducted, the tournament committee had supplied the list of Members of Jahu Team to the police. However, no such list has been produced on record during the course of trial by the prosecution. Admittedly, the test identification parade was not conducted by the police in this case. Therefore, the prosecution story that the eye witnesses were not in a position to identify the accused persons in the Court, can not be believed to be true by any stretch of imagination. 16. Now coming to the testimony of PW-7 Madan Singh, though prosecution claims himself to be an eye witness, however, as per his version he reached on the spot after the occurrence was over. Therefore, he was not present on the spot at the time of occurrence, hence, can not be termed to be an eye witness. PW-8 Dharam Pal, who happens to be the nephew of deceased Kaul Ram, though had supported the prosecution case, however, in his cross-examination, he expressed his ignorance as to how names of the accused persons were disclosed by him before the police. He was knowing the names of accused persons and not ascertained their names from others. PW-8 Dharam Pal, who happens to be the nephew of deceased Kaul Ram, though had supported the prosecution case, however, in his cross-examination, he expressed his ignorance as to how names of the accused persons were disclosed by him before the police. He was knowing the names of accused persons and not ascertained their names from others. Had it been so, it is not known as to why the names of accused persons were not disclosed by him to the police at the time of registration of the case. Interestingly enough, when a suggestion was put to him by learned defence counsel, it is admitted that the accused were not the members of one team and rather they were members of different teams. If the accused were not the Members of Jahu team, this witness has failed to explain as to for which team they were playing. He also failed to spell out as to how many accused were playing for Jahu team and who were playing for other teams. His testimony is also of no help to the prosecution case. The another material witness PW-13 Ram Singh, a Tea Vendor, had though supported the prosecution case qua the manner in which the occurrence has taken place, however, it is difficult to believe that he could have witness the occurrence and also manage the affairs of his tea-stall simultaneously. PW-16 Devinder Mehta, Pradhan of Cricket Tournament Committee, has also been examined by the prosecution in support of its case. As per his version, he was not present on the spot at the time of occurrence and rather came there later, hence, his testimony is also of no help to the prosecution case, particularly as per his version in cross-examination he never stated before the police that he was informed about the occurrence by PW-2 Roshan Lal and rather the said witness had informed him that they (PW-2 and deceased) were beaten up by the Members of Jahu Team. The names of the accused persons being assailants were also not disclosed by PW-2 Roshan Lal before him. As per the admission on his part accused Jai Chand was not playing cricket on behalf of Jahu team. The names of the accused persons being assailants were also not disclosed by PW-2 Roshan Lal before him. As per the admission on his part accused Jai Chand was not playing cricket on behalf of Jahu team. Therefore, it would not be improper to conclude that the assailants were not the Members of Jahu team alone but may be the members of other teams also and it is for this reason, the list of the Members of Jahu team was not produced nor proved in evidence during the course of trial. 17. The medical evidence is also not suggestive of that the injuries noticed on the dead body, while conducting autopsy on it, could have been caused with bat Ext. P-1. No doubt, PW-17 Dr. Piyush Kapila, has recorded his findings vide Ext. PW-17/C and as per the same, the fatal injuries No. 3, 4, 6, 7 & 8 in the post mortem report could have possibly been caused with bat Ext. P-1. Ext. PW-17/C, however, records that blood was not present over the bat Ext. P-1. In our opinion, had this much number of fatal injuries been caused with the bat Ext. P-1, some blood oozed out over some part of the same was bound to appear. Dr. Piyush Kapila, PW-17, has admitted the suggestion that in a case where strong force with sufficient intensity is used while causing injury with cricket bat, the result would have been fracture and smash of the skull. The post mortem report, however, reveals that there was no fracture on the skull of deceased nor it was found to be smashed. It is doubtful that bat Ext. P-1 was the weapon of offence and it was with accused Jai Chand for the reason that when no blood was found available thereon, the same cannot be said to be the weapon of offence and rather a normal bat available with every cricket player. The bat Ext. P-1 was not the only bat there and rather every team participating in a cricket tournament, at least owns two bats. All bats are almost similar in size and structure. There is even nothing to show that the fatal injuries were caused with bat Ext. P-1 alone and not in any other manner, including fall and scuffle etc. etc. P-1 was not the only bat there and rather every team participating in a cricket tournament, at least owns two bats. All bats are almost similar in size and structure. There is even nothing to show that the fatal injuries were caused with bat Ext. P-1 alone and not in any other manner, including fall and scuffle etc. etc. PW-9 Constable Krishan Lal; PW-10 Sudhanshu Kapoor; PW-11 Jawala Dass, Pradhan Gram Panchayat, Krangla; PW-14 again Jawala Dass; PW-15 Gurdev Singh; PW-16 Devinder Mehta; PW-19 HC Diwan Chand; PW-20 HC Devi Singh and PW-26 HHC Pradeep Kumar, as discussed in Para-7 of the judgment, are formal witnesses or turned hostile to the prosecution. Their evidence at the most could have been termed as link evidence had the prosecution been otherwise able to prove its case against the accused persons that the it is they alone were assailants and it is they alone who administered beatings to deceased Kaul Ram and also PW-2 Roshan Lal. PW-21 Inspector Sangat Ram Negi and PW-25 Sub Inspector Balwant Singh, are the Investigating Officers in the case. The evidence as has come on record by way of their testimonies cannot also be taken to record the findings of conviction against the accused persons. 18. The re-appraisal of the evidence available on record, therefore, makes it crystal clear that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubt. They, as such, have rightly been given benefit of doubt and resultantly, acquitted of the charge framed against each of them. The well reasoned judgment passed by learned trial Court, therefore, call for no interference by this Court and the same rather deserves to be affirmed. 19. For all the reasons hereinabove, this appeal fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the impugned judgment passed by learned trial Court, is affirmed. The personal bonds furnished by the accused persons shall stand cancelled and the surety bonds discharged. The appeal stands accordingly disposed of.