Judgment VINOD SHANKAR DAVE, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of the judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara, dated 8/12/1977/ 7/1/1978 whereby the learned Judge convicted the accused appellant, Jitu for offence under sections 326 and 327 I. P. C. and on each count sentenced him to three years rigorous imprisonment and a find of Rs. 500. 00. In default of payment of fine to further undergo 4 months rigorous imprisonment and convicted six other accused-appellants under sections 327 and 329 and under section 323 I. P. C. and sentenced each of them to undergo one years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months imprisonment for the first offence and for the latter to three months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine two months further rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. ( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are that a typed report was lodged at Police Station Gangapur on behalf of Ambalal Jat, P. W. 6 wherein it was alleged by him that at the time of sun set on the previous evening i. e. on 1. 9. 76 he was smoking sitting outside his house along with his younger brother Magna and another Magna s/o Jodha Jat. At that time accused Sohan Lal, Kushal and Gordhan, residents of Kangani village came there and Sohanlal told him that his brother Mangilal has got acute pain in his stomach hence both the brothers are called at Kangani. Hearing this he went to Kangani where he was taken to the hotel of Nanalal Devi. Jitu, Gordhan, Banshi and Jeevraj along with Perna and Kajod were already sitting there. Accused Jitu told him that he should pay the money to his brother Nana on which he protested and denied that any amount was outstanding against him Thereupon it is alleged that Jitu took a knife from Gordhan and inflicted injury which bit him on the ear resulting in perfuse bleeding. Thereafter Sohanlal gave a lathi blow on his right thigh and Gordhan, by the backside of an axe, inflicted him injury on his chest. He also attributed injuries to Banshi, Kushal and others. Thereafter Sohanlal gave a lathi blow on his right thigh and Gordhan, by the backside of an axe, inflicted him injury on his chest. He also attributed injuries to Banshi, Kushal and others. At that time his brother Mangu came to intervene, on which Perna, Lehru and Jeevraj also beat him. It is said that thereafter Jeevraj Mahajan scribed a promote in the sum of Rs. 1500/- and obtained his thumb impression forcibly. It is alleged that is brother Mangilal Magna was also compelled to sign the pronote. On receipt of this report a case under sections 147, 307, 148, 323 and 149 I. P. C. was registered and investigation commenced. During the course of investigation, Ambalal and Magna were got medically examined at Government Hospilal, Gangapur, where Dr. K. K. Agarwal, who examined them found the following injuries on Amba Lal and Mangoo respectively: - 1. One oblique contusion 11/2 x over the right chest above the nipple. 2. One oblique contusion x 1/2 over the outer and middle region of right thigh. One contusion 1 x 11/2 over superior angle of left scapula back. One oblique incised wound 11/4 x 1/4 through the ear cartilege over the upper 3rd region of right ear. 1. One oblique contusion 2 x 1/2 over the right back and outer region. 2. One oblique contusion 1 x near the 9th Thorasicspine right back. 3. One Transverse contusion 2 x 1/4 over the back of right shoulder. 4. One contusion 1 x 1/2 over the back of middle region of right arm. One longitudinal contusion 41/2 x 1/4 over the thinner and middle region of left forearm. One oblique contusion 11 x 1 near the 4th Thorasic spine left side back. ( 3 ) THE promissory note book as well as Bahi was also recovered from accused Nana Lal and after arrest of the accused persons and completing the investigation, charge sheet was submitted in the court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Gangapur, who committed all the seven accused appellants to face trial before the Addi. Sessions Judge, Bhilwara. ( 4 ) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charges under sections 120-B, 307/1 20b, 327/120b against all the accused-appellants who pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. At trial the prosecution examined 10 witnesses in support of its case. Sessions Judge, Bhilwara. ( 4 ) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charges under sections 120-B, 307/1 20b, 327/120b against all the accused-appellants who pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. At trial the prosecution examined 10 witnesses in support of its case. Accused denied the occurrence as alleged by the prosecution and came with the case that the prosecution story of getting the document exhorted is absolutely incorrect. In fact the document was get written in the month of Bhadaw and that it was for an amount of Rs. 1700/- anti was written at the instance of Ambalal and it was written on behalf of Nana Lal. ( 5 ) IT is submitted that since there are two parties in the village this incident has been falsely narrated against them. Defence also examined two witnesses out of which one is accused Jeevraj and another accused Nanalal, both of whom have examined themselves on oath. Their case is that there were two earlier pronotes of Rs 701/- and yet another of the equal amount and later on after adding the interest and other factors the third pronote of Rs 1701/- for the consolidated amount was written voluntarily. ( 6 ) THE learned Sessions Judge found the prosecution story true on the strength of the evidence of P. W. 6, P. W. 7, P. W. 9 and P. W. 10 and convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants as indicated above. Aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence the accused-appellants have come to this court. ( 7 ) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-appellants submitted that the prosecution story is not worthy of reliance and the story of extorting the promissory note is in fact an afterthought and has been brought out to give a gravity to an ordinary scuffle which took place between the parties. It is submitted that the First Information Report is a typed document and has been filed after due deliberations but it is not truthful and goes contrary to the prosecutions own evidence Ex. p. 9 and p. 12 which is a clue for showing that the document was not extorted. It is thereafter submitted that a perusal of Ex. It is submitted that the First Information Report is a typed document and has been filed after due deliberations but it is not truthful and goes contrary to the prosecutions own evidence Ex. p. 9 and p. 12 which is a clue for showing that the document was not extorted. It is thereafter submitted that a perusal of Ex. p. i and p. 2 makes it clear that there were no grievous injury on the person of any of the injured and the conviction of Jeetu for offence under section 326 is perverse. Neither the doctor in his statement has said so nor the injury report so discloses. ( 8 ) THE learned public prosecutor has supported the findings of the trial court and submits that the story as given by complainant injured must be accepted since it finds corroboration from the statements of Dr. K. K. Agarwal. P. W. 1 and the documents Ex. p. 9 and p. 12. ( 9 ) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the document. ( 10 ) SO far as the offence under section 326 against accused Jitu is concerned I have no hesitation in saying that the entire finding is perverse. Neither the Dr. K. K. Agarwal in his statement bas said so nor the learned Judge has given at any place in his judgment as to bow he held any of the injury to be grievous. A perusal of the Ex. p. i shows that the injury on the basis of which grievous injury has been held is nothing but a simple injury. In this eventuality I am inclined to alter the conviction of accused Jitu from offence under section 326 to one under section 324 I. P. C. ( 11 ) SO far as the other accused persons are concerned there is cogent evidence on record to substantiate that they participated in the dispute which caused multiple injuries on the person of both the injured by blunt object and therefore they have been rightly convicted for offence under section 323 I. P. C. However, it still remains to be decided whether offence under section 327 I. P. C. is made out in the circumstances of the case beyond any manner of doubt. Ex. Ex. p. io is the First Information Report which is a comprehensive document giving all the details and showing that Jeevraj brought out a promissory note in his own handwriting which is for a sum of Rs. 1500/ -. I have perused the promissory note Ex. p. 9 on record. This promissory note it is alleged have been extorted. After giving beating and Ex. p. 9 is not for a sum of Rs. 1500/- but it is written for an amount of Rs. 1701/ -. Obviously this promissory note does not corroborate what was the prosecution story in the very beginning and either the promissory note is not the one which the prosecution wants to prove in the Court or the First Information Report is based on erroneous presumptions. In this respect I have no reason to disbelieve the statement of the defence witnesses D. W. 1 and D. W. 2 that the promissory note of Rs. 1701/- was written after calculating the accounts as is given in Ex. p. 12 and therefore, the prosecution story regarding getting the document written per force after beating appears to be a subsequent made out story. I, therefore, am not inclined to sustain the conviction of the accused-appellants under sections 327 and 327/109 I. P. C. ( 12 ) REGARDING the sentence part of it since I am acquitting the accused of the offence under sections 327 and 327/109 I. P. C. the only conviction remains is for an offence under Section 324 I. P. C. so far as Jitu is concerned and all others for offence under section 323 I. P. C. and in that eventuality the sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment on Jitu and one years and three months rigorous imprisonment under section 323 I. P. C on all other accused persons is excessive particularly when the offence was committed in the year 1976 and nine years have eventually lapsed. ( 13 ) AS a matter of the aforesaid discussion. ( 13 ) AS a matter of the aforesaid discussion. I partly allow the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence of accused Jitu for offence under section 327 I. P. C. and that of other accused persons for offence under sections 327/109 I. P. C. The conviction of accused-appellant Jitu from offence 326 I. P. C. is altered to one under section 324 I. P. C. and his substantive sentence of three years is reduced to the period already undergone. However, the fine on that count is maintained. So far as the other accused persons are concerned their conviction under section 323 I. P. C. is maintained and so far as their sentence is concerned it is reduced to the period already undergone and however the sentence of fine is maintained. The fine recovered shall be paid as compensation to injured Ambalal. Appeals partly allowed.