JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 30.3.1976 of the learned additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur by the appellant who has been convicted under section 193 I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 200/- in default of payment of which to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. 2. The relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal are these. A complaint was filed under sections 302, 201, 120B and 147 I.P.C. before the Munsif Magistrate, Jodhpor District. In support of this complaint Laduram appellant was examined under section 202 Cr.P.C, and he supported the allegations made in the complaint. The learned Magistrate thereafter took cognizance of the case and after conducting the enquiry under section 208 Cr.P.C. committed the accused for trial to the court of Sessions. In the trial Laduram appeared as prosecution witness No.5 and denied his knowledge about the crime and resiled from his previous statement. The learned Additional Sessions Judge no. 2, therefore, directed his prosecution under Section 193 I.P.C. Thereafter a complaint was filed in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Jodhpur, who committed the appellant to the Sessions. The statement made by the appellant under section 202 Cr.P.C. is Ex.P.2 and statement during the sessions trial for murder is Ex.P.3. While convicting the appellant the learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that in his statement Ex P.3 given at the Sessions trial for murder, the appellant categorically admitted that the statement Ex-P.2 under section 202 Cr.P.C. was false to his knowledge and he gave the statement knowing it to be false. The learned Judge Held that the statement Ex.P.2 given by the appellant on 6.10.1972 and 7.10.1972 was false to his knowledge. It appears that during the trial it was sought to be argued that the additional Sessions Judge was not competent to file the complaint and the entire prosecution is bad. The learned Additional Sessions Judge after discussing the law come to a finding that the statement made by the appellant under section 202 Cr. P.C. was in relation to the proceedings in the trial before the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 and, therefore, he was competent to file a complaint. The only point pressed before me by the learned counsel for the appellant is that in the facts and circumstances of the case the sentence awarded is excessive. P.C. was in relation to the proceedings in the trial before the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2 and, therefore, he was competent to file a complaint. The only point pressed before me by the learned counsel for the appellant is that in the facts and circumstances of the case the sentence awarded is excessive. The matter relates to the year 1972. It further appears that the witness under some undue influence was compelled to give a false statement. In the circumstances I reduce the substantive sentence awarded to Laduram from two years to one year. However, the sentence of fine : is maintained. 3. The appeal is dismissed accordingly with the said modification in the sentence.Appeal partly allowed. *******