The accused were charged under Section 302/148 and 149 of IPC as they were alleged to have caused death by hurling of bomb but direct bomb blast injuries were not found on the body of the deceased and there was substan¬tial difference in ocular and medical evidence as to the injuries and cause of death. Therefore the conviction of the accused was set aside. It was observed by the Court that once an accused is acquitted u/s 148 the conviction u/s 149 IPC, could not be ordered. In which of the follow¬ing case this was upheld?