JUDGMENT S.Z. Hasan, J. - This is an appeal against the judgment of Sri S.N. Lal, Ist Additional Sessions Judge, convicting and sentencing Taqdiru accused to four years R.I. under Section 326, IPC and two years R.I. under Section 452, IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Ishaq, Jamil and Shahabuddin accused were each convicted and sentenced to four years R.I. under Sections 307/34, IPC Khaliq, Ibrar, Bashir and Faiyaz accused were acquitted. 2. It is said that on May 9, 1978 eight goats of Sohrab, the brother of Taqdiru, were impounded by the son of Haqqu Khan. In that connection Jamil and Ishaq came on May 15, 1978 at about 10 A.M. and invited Haqqu Khan for holding a Panchayat. During the Panchayat Jamil accused asked Haqqu (P.W.1) to offer apology to Taqdiru accused. On his refusal Taqdiru accused armed with a pharsa and the four accused, who have been acquitted, chased Haqqu and entered his house. Taqdiru accused gave one pharsa blow causing one incised wound with fracture on the arm of Haqqu (P.W.1). Jamil, Ishaq and Shahabuddin accused fired their pistols causing injuries to Kallu, Ajjan, Siraj and Ayub. All these four persons received gun-shot injuries. They were medically examined between 3 and 4.30 p.m. on the same day. Haqqu (P.W.1) and Kallu (P.W.3) are witnesses of fact. Anis (P.W.2) is also an eye-witness. The remaining witnesses are of formal nature. The accused persons denied the charge and examined (D.W.1) Bachu Khan in support of their case. It is said that during the dark hours some persons started firing causing injuries to these persons. The learned trial Judge acquitted four accused persons as mentioned above and sentenced the appellants as stated above. Hence this appeal. 3. As many as four persons received gun-shot injuries. Haqqu (P.W.1) received one incised wound with fracture of bone of his arm. So in the normal course they must have tried to rush them to the hospital. Medical examination started at 3 p.m. So it was a clear case of assault during broad day light. The defence version that the occurrence took place during dark hours of night is absurd. The statements of the eye-witnesses do not suffer from any material infirmity. 4. Medical examination started at 3 p.m. So it was a clear case of assault during broad day light. The defence version that the occurrence took place during dark hours of night is absurd. The statements of the eye-witnesses do not suffer from any material infirmity. 4. The learned counsel for the accused did not argue the case on merits and simply contended that no case under Section 307, IPC was made out and at the most the offence committed by Jamil, Ishaq and Shahabuddin accused fell under Section 324, IPC. He suggested that some fine may be imposed as there was no sense in sending the accused persons to jail. To my mind, a case under Sections 326 IPC and 452, IPC has been clearly made out against Taqdiru accused. He caused injury to Haqqu (P.W.1) with pharsa. So far as Jamil, Ishaq and Shahabuddin accused are concerned, they had no direct enmity with the four Panches present there. Most of the injuries are on non vital parts. So it does not appear that there was any intention to commit murder on the facts of the case no offence under Section 307, IPC is made out. In view of all the above I hold that a case under Sections 324/34 IPC is made out against Jamil, Ishaq and Shahabuddin accused. 5. The appeal is dismissed with the modification that the conviction of Jamil, Ishaq and Shahabuddin accused under Sections 7/34, IPC is altered to that under Sections 24/34, IPC and their Sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone. Each of them is further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,500/- within thirty days from the date of receipt of notice from the Magistrate concerned and in case of defaults the defaulter will undergo one years R.I. The conviction of Taqdiru accused under Section 326 IPC and 452, IPC is confirmed end his sentence of imprisonment under both the counts is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone. He is further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- within thirty days from the date of receipt of notice from the Magistrate concerned. In case of default, he will undergo one year's R.I. Out of the fine, if realised, the five injured persons namely, Haqqu (P.W.1), Kallu (P.W.3), Ajjan, Sirai and Ayub will get Rs. 1,000/- each as compensation. 1,000/- within thirty days from the date of receipt of notice from the Magistrate concerned. In case of default, he will undergo one year's R.I. Out of the fine, if realised, the five injured persons namely, Haqqu (P.W.1), Kallu (P.W.3), Ajjan, Sirai and Ayub will get Rs. 1,000/- each as compensation. After the fine is realized, the learned Magistrate will inform these persons regarding the same.