JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been preferred against the judgement passed by the Sessions Judge, Pali dated April 25, 1977 by which the appellant was convicted for the offence under section 304 part II I.P.C. and sentenced to three years R.I. 2. At the commencement of the arguments the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he does not want to press the appeal on merits but prays for a lenient view being taken in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the young age of the appellant. 3. From the perusal of the record it is evident that the quarrel had taken place at the spur of the moment. There was no premeditation or enmity between the deceased and the accused. Only one fatal blow was dealt with by the appellant. The learned Judge in these circumstances has considered the case as one under section 304 part II I.P.C. 4. The age of the appellant at the time of recording the statement on February 7, 1977 was stated to be 25 years. The incident relates to the year 1975. The appellant had remained in custody since his arrest on October 3, 1975 till he was released on bail by the order of this Court dated May, 5, 1977. I do not consider it to be a case in which the appellant may be sent behind the bars after a lapse of a period of about seven years after the date of the incident and about five years after the date of his being released on bail. 5. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the ends of justice would meet if the sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to the period he had remained in custody and imposing some fine. 6. Consequently, the appeal is party allowed. The sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to the period he had remained in custody so far. However, he shall be also liable to a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo three months simple imprisonment for the aforesaid offence. At the request of his learned counsel, appellant is allowed two months time to deposit the amount of fine in the trial Court. *******