JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal arises on leave granted by this Court under section 378 (iii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated the 8th May, 1978, of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banswara, acquitting the accused for the offence under Section 326 IPC. 2. The accused-respondent was tried for the offence under Section 326 IPC for causing injuries by a Kulhari on the body of Veersingh on November, 22, 1973 at about 7.30 P.M. in his field at village Partapur. The prosecution case, in brief, was that on the date of the incident, an ox belonging to the accused had entered the field of Veersingh, who protested against this and used abuses against the accused. This annoyed the accused who, according to the prosecution, gave blows to Veersingh by an axe, which was with him. Veersingh was taken to the hospital. He was examined by Dr. Solomen on November 23, 1973. The following injuries were found on his body:- "1. Punctured wound 21/2"x 1" x 21/2" above the left clavicle bone extending from its medical and to the mid clavicler point. The wound is penetrating the left side of the chest and opening the left pleural cavity and 4 cms. exposing the upper lobe of the left lung. Grievous by sharp weapon. 2. Incised wound 1/2" x 1/2" upper part of the left lobule of the ear cutting the cartilags. Simple sharp. 3. Abrasion 1" x 1/4" left side of the chest just above the left nipple. Simple blunt. 4. Abrasion 1" x 1/2" lateral aspect of the left arm. Simple. 5. Abrasion I1/2" x 1/2" posterior aspect of the left shoulder joint. Simple blunt. 6. Abrasion 1" x ⅛" left lateral side of the chest at the level of the rib. Simple blunt. 3. A first information report of the occurrence was lodged by Vade at Police station, Gadi on Nov. 23, 1973, on which a case under Sections 307 tmd 326 IPC was registered against the accused and investigation started,The accused was arrested and an axe was recovered at his instance. Simple blunt. 3. A first information report of the occurrence was lodged by Vade at Police station, Gadi on Nov. 23, 1973, on which a case under Sections 307 tmd 326 IPC was registered against the accused and investigation started,The accused was arrested and an axe was recovered at his instance. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against him in the Court of the Magistrate who committed him to the Court of Sessions to stand trial for the offence under Section 307 IPC, but the Sessions Judge by bis order dated the 3rd March, 1975, framed a charge under Section 326 I PC only and remitted the case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate for trial. The accused was then tried for the offence under Section 326 IPC. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. After trial, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, by his order dated the 8th May, 1978, acquitted the accused. Aggrieved by this, the State filed an application for leave to appeal under Section 378 (3) Cr. PC and this Court, by the order dated the 13th September, 1978, granted leave giving rise to the present appeal. 5. Shri S.S. Bhandawat, Public Prosecutor, has urged that the Chief Judicial Magistrate has committed an error in acquitting the accused for the offence under Section 326 IPC. The learned Public Prosecutor has read over the judgment under.appeal and has taken me through the relevant evidence. The prosecution case rests on the evidence of Veersingh, who received the injuries. After going through the evidence of this witnesses do not find grounds to differ from the assessment of his testimony, made by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, The case depends on appreciation the evidence of this single witness. The learned Magistrate has given good reasons for not placing reliance on his testimony. The name of the accused was not mentioned in the first information report, although it was lodged the next day at 3.30 P.M. There are other infirmities in the evidence of this witness, pointed out by the learned Magistrate and it would not be safe to convict the accused after reversing his acquittal on the testimony of this witness. The occurrence took place in November, 1973. It is over twelve years. The accused was then 16 years of age, as I mentioned in the arrest memo and the bail order dated the 28th November 1973. The occurrence took place in November, 1973. It is over twelve years. The accused was then 16 years of age, as I mentioned in the arrest memo and the bail order dated the 28th November 1973. The acquittal is based on appraisal of oral evidence and I do not find any substantial ground to re-appraise the evidence and reverse the order of acquittal. 6. The result is, that the appeal fails and is dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******