JUDGMENT 1. - Appellant Krishna Kumar has preferred this appeal against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 Hanumangarh by which he was convicted to 8 months rigorous imprisonment under section 324 I. P. C. and to three months rigorous imprisonment under section 27 of the Indian Arms Act. 2. The only point pressed before me is that the appellant is a young farmer and this was his first offence. He has remained in detention from 23-9-77 to 7.1.1978 and from 14-9-78 to 16-9-78. It is also submitted that the learned lower court was bound to consider the case of the appellant for the grant of probation. The learned counsel for the appellant further urged that the appellant had already undergone imprisonment for more than three months, and therefore, in the fitness of things the substantive sentence should be reduced to the period already undergone and the case may not be remitted to the lower court for the consideration of the case of the appellant for probation. 3. I have carefully considered the argument. The learned Public Prosecutor also could not point out any serious circumstance against the appellant. The motive of the crime appeared to be trivial in as much as the injured used to insist that the appellant should not take drinks. 4. I, therefore, feel that the ends of justice would be met if the substantive sentence is reduced to a term already undergone. However, in my opinion, the appellant should also be sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- under section 324 I. P. C. The fine so recovered should be given to Jainarayan, the injured. With these observations the appeal is dismissed but the substantive sentence awarded to the appellant under section 324 I. P. C. is reduced to a term already undergone. However, he shall be further liable to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- which he shall deposit in the lower court within a period of one month. The fine so recovered be given to Jainarayan, the injured.Appeal dismissed into modification. *******