Short Note : 1. In this revision, the applicant Ratanlal has challenged his conviction under Section 326 of the Penal Code for which he was sentenced to under go rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 200/-, or in default of payment of fine, to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. 2. The prosecution case is this: The applicant used to tease young girls. Krishna Murari (P.W 2) objected to this and, therefore, he got annoyed with Krishna Murari. On June 10, 1974, in the evening, when Krishna Murari was going towards the market, the applicant stabbed him with a knife near Jhanda Chauk. Krishna Murari (PW 2) went to the Khurari Police Station and lodged the first information report (Ex. P-5) at 7.15 p. m. the same day. Held: I have heard Shri S.C. Datta, counsel for the applicant Shri. J.M. Sood, Government Advocate, for the State. I am of the view that the conviction of the applicant under section 326 of the Penal Code could not be sustained. 3. Krishna Murari (P.W. 2) is the injured person. He stated that the applicant had stabbed him and thereafter ran away. In paragraph 4, he stated that he had seen the applicant after he had received injury. In the same paragraph, he stated that after he had received the injury, he saw the applicant at a distance of one and a half feet. He further stated that he saw the applicant after he had passed by his side and at this time he had no knife with him. In paragraph 7, he stated that he had suspected the applicant and, therefore, mentioned his name in the report (Ex. P-5). These acts show that Krishna Murari (PW 2) had not seen the applicant actually stabbing him and that he mentioned his name on suspicion. Therefore, his report (Ex. P-5), though lodged without loss of time could not be used to corroborate his version. Revision allowed.