JUDGMENT 1. - The appeal can be decided on a short point which was ultimately pressed by Mr. Ganpatsingh as the last weapon in his armoury in this appeal. 2. The accused has been convicted under section 326 IPC but sentenced only for one year. It is common ground that he has already remained in jail for 64 days excluding the period for remission. 3. Mr. Ganpat Singh's submission is that since the incident is of 1975 and 11 years have rolled in, it would be inexpedient to sent the accused to jail now even if the finding of guilt is confirmed. 4. Mr. Basant Raj learned Public Prosecutor submits that in that case the fine should be increased and compensation should be paid to the injured. 5. On a thoughtful consideration of the entire matter I am of the opinion that the finding of guilt recorded by the trial court is well established on the bass of just and proper appreciation of the evidence and calls for no interference. 6. However, so far as the question of reduction of sentence is concerned, the circumstances pointed out by Mr. Ganpatsingh cannot be ignored and brushed aside. 7. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed but the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to already undergone and the fine is increased from Rs. 1000/- to Rs. 2000/-. This amount would be paid as compensation to the injured Onkar. If the fine is not paid within a period of six months from the date of the receipt of the record by the trial court, the accused shall undergo the sentence of three months in default of payment of fine.Appeal partly allowed. *******