JUDGMENT 1. Sobhag Mal Jain, J. 1. By the judgment dated October 13, 1978 the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh has convicted and sentenced the appellants as under: (1) Ganesh Lal Under Section 304, Part-I 7 years RI a fine Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine one month further RI; (2) Mohan Lal IPC three years' RI and a fine of Rs. 200/-in default of payment of fine to one month's further RI. Under Section 325, Indian Penal Code three years' RI and a fine of Rs. 200/-in default of payment of fine to one month's further RI. Under Section 325/34, Indian Penal Code three years' RI and a fine of Rs. 200/-in default of payment of fine to one month's further RI. (3) Bhawan Lal Under Section 304, Part-I, Indian Penal Code 7 years RI and a fine of Rs. Indian Penal Code 200/-, in default of payment of fine one month's further RI; Under Section 325/34, Indian Penal Code Three years' RI and a fine of Rs. 200/- in default of payment of fine to one month's further RI; All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case in brief was that there was a dispute between the accused and deceased Motilal relating to the marriage of Laxmi, daughter of Motilal. The accused Mohanlal had burnt the wheat crop of Motilal. On account of this, litigation was going on between the parties. On the night intervening April 18 and 19, 1977 it is alleged that accused came to the house of the deceased. Mohanlal was armed with an axe and the other accused, namely, Ganeshlal and Bhagwanlal were armed with Lathis. Onkarmal and Sawailal were also sleeping in the same house. It is alleged that all the accused caused injuries to Motilal, Onkarmal and Sawailal as a result of which Motilal died on April 19, 1977. On hearing the alarm raised by the injured Laxmi and Shankerlal also reached there and the accused then left the place. The First Information Report of the occurrence was lodged by Shankerlal at Police Station, Dungla on April 19, 1977 at 7.00 a.m. A case under Section 302 and 307 Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused and investigation started. The investigating officer reached the place of incident, prepared the site inspection memo, seized the blood stained earth and conducted inquest of the deceased Motilal. The investigating officer reached the place of incident, prepared the site inspection memo, seized the blood stained earth and conducted inquest of the deceased Motilal. The post-mortem examination of the deceased was conducted by Dr. Damodar Pareek on April 19, 1977 at 3.00 p.m.There were 14 injuries on the body of the deceased, all by blunt weapon. According to the doctor the cause of death was haemorrhage and shock. He also examined the injuries of Onkarmal and Sawailal. They too received received blunt weapon injuries. Both of them had sustained fractures. The Investigating Officer also recovered lathis on the information and at the instance of the accused, but they were not found to be blood stained. After investigation the police submitted a charge-shees against the accused in the court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Dungla. The learned Magistrate committed the accused to the court of Sessions to stand trial for the offences under Section 302/307/34, Indian Penal Code. 3. The accused were charged for the offences under Sections 302, 302/34, 307 and 307/34, Indian Penal Code by the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh, camp Chittorgarh. Their plea was recorded. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution based its case on four eye witnesses, namely, Onkarmal, Sawailal, Shankarlal and Laxmi. In their statements recorded under Section 313, Cr. PC the accused denied the prosecution allegations and said that they had been falsely implicated on account of enmity. Two witnesses, namely, Bhanwarlal and Pyarelal were examined in defence who deposed that the accused on the night of the occurrence were at Biloda. 4. After trial the Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid. It was held that Motilal deceased and Onkarmal and Sawailal sustained injuries on the night of incident and Motilal had died as a result of those injuries. Onkarmal and Sawailal had sustained two grevious injuries each. The learned Sessions Judge further held that all the accused were armed with lathis and the fact that. Mohanlal was armed with an axe was falsely introduced by the witnesses. The learned Sessions Judge believed the evidence of the four eye witnesses and by relying on their testimony held that accused were responsible for causing injuries to Motilal. Onkarmal and Sawailal and that Motilal died on account of the injuries inflicted by the accused. Mohanlal was armed with an axe was falsely introduced by the witnesses. The learned Sessions Judge believed the evidence of the four eye witnesses and by relying on their testimony held that accused were responsible for causing injuries to Motilal. Onkarmal and Sawailal and that Motilal died on account of the injuries inflicted by the accused. The learned Sessions Judge however held that it was not established by the prosecution that the accused caused the injuries with the intention to kill the deceased. The accused were not having any sharp edged weapon. The deceased died on account of the haemorrhage and shock. The accused were accordingly acquitted for the offences under Sections 302, 302/34, 307 and 307/34 Indian Penal Code but were convicted for the offence under Section 304, Part-I, 325 and 325/34 Indian Penal Code as aforesaid. Aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentenced passed by the learned Sessions Judge the accused have preferred the present appeal in this court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Shri K.N. Joshi, counsel for the appellant has not challenged the fact that the accused were responsible for inflicting injuries to Motilal deceased and Onkarmal and Sawailal. It is also not disputed that Motilal died on account of the injuries sustained by him. The learned Sessions Judge has relied on the evidence of four eye witnesses, namely, Onkarmal, Sawailal, Shankerlal and Laxmi. After going through the statements of these witnesses I concur with the finding of the learned Sessions Judge that the evidence given by these witnesses is reliable. Onkarmal and Sawailal were themselves injured and their presence at the spot cannot be denied. Shankerlal and Laxmi were living nearby the place of incident and reached the spot as soon as they heard the alarm raised by the injured. Learned counsel has rightly not challenged their testimony. The mere fact that these witnesses introduced an axe in the hand of Mohanlal would not render their evidence unreliable. It is established from the evidence of these witnesses that the three accused Ganeshlal, Mohanlal and Bhagwanlal went to the house of the deceased and caused injuries to Motilal, Onkarlal and Sawailal by lathis. Motilal died as a result of the injuries and Onkarmal and Sawailal also sustained simple and grevious injuries. It is established from the evidence of these witnesses that the three accused Ganeshlal, Mohanlal and Bhagwanlal went to the house of the deceased and caused injuries to Motilal, Onkarlal and Sawailal by lathis. Motilal died as a result of the injuries and Onkarmal and Sawailal also sustained simple and grevious injuries. The learned Sessions Judge has rightly held that all the three accused were sesponsible for causing the injuries to the deceased and the injured. 6. Shri Joshi has however contended that the offence against the accused would not exceed 325 Indian Penal Code. Learned Sessions Judge himself has disbelieved the prosecution story that Mohanlal was armed with an axe. According to the Sessions Judge all the three accused had gone there having lathis in their hands. From the evidence of the eye witnesses, it is not clear who was responsible for causing the fatal blow to the deceased. The learned Sessions Judge has further held that the prosecution has not established that the accused caused the injuries with an intention to kill the deceased. After going through the evidence of the witnesses I am not satisfied that the common intention of the accused was to kill the deceased. They wanted to cause injuries to the deceased and the other injured and for which they can at the most be convicted under Section 325 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code. 7. Accordingly, I set aside the conviction of the appellants for the offence under Section 304, Part-I, Indian Penal Code and instead convict them for the offence under Section 325/34 Indian Penal Code. Coming to the question of sentence, the accused have already remained in custody for more than three months The incident took place as back as April 16, 1977. It is over 10 years now. It would not advance justice and would rather thwart it if the accused are sent to jail again. In the circumstances of the case the sentence already undergone by them will meet the ends of justice. I am however, of the opinion that the sentence of fine awarded to the accused deserved to be increased. The Legal representatives of the deceased and that injured should be paid by way of compensation. Shri Joshi, learned counsel for the appellant himself suggested that the amount of fine may be increased to Rs. 5,000/- each. I am however, of the opinion that the sentence of fine awarded to the accused deserved to be increased. The Legal representatives of the deceased and that injured should be paid by way of compensation. Shri Joshi, learned counsel for the appellant himself suggested that the amount of fine may be increased to Rs. 5,000/- each. Looking to the circumstances of the case, a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each in addition to the sentence already undergone by each of the accused should be imposed. 8. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellants for the offence under Section 304, Indian Penal Code is altered to one under Section 325/34 Indian Penal Code. The sentence awarded to the accused is reduced to the period already undergone by them. The amount of fine shall be increased to Rs. 5000/- against each of the accused. In default of payment of fine the accused shall undergo one year's further rigorous imprisonment. The amount of fine when realised shall be paid as compensation to the legal representatives of deceased Motilal the injnred Onkarmal and Sawailal in equal shares. The accused are given two months' time to deposit the fine. The amount of fine shall be deposited in the court of Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh.Appeal partly allowed. *******