Judgment SOBHAG MAL JAM, J. ( 1 ) BY the judgment dated July 21, 1987, the Addi. Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, has convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offence under section 326 I. P. C. to four years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default of payment of fine to further R. I. for four months. ( 2 ) THE case relates to the incident, which took place on May 20, 1982, at 7. 45 a. m. near the old railway phatak near Miratgani. The prosecution case, in brief, was that on the date of the incident Rameshwar was returning from the P. W. D. office where he was serving. When he was near the railway phatak, the accused came from behind and askedt him why he was telling lies against him. There was altercation between them. When Rameshwar moved a short distance ahead, the accused struck from behind a knife in his stomach and then ran away. Rameshwar was taken to the hospital and was admitted there. A telephonic message was conveyed from the hospital to the police station Chittorgarh on which Shri Bhagwat Singh, A. S. I. reached the hospital and recorded the statement of Rameshwar, which has been treated as the first information report of the occurrence. This was lodged the same day at 9. 30 a. m. A case under section 307, I. P. C. was registered against the accused and investigation started. The injuries of Rameshwar were examined by Dr. R. D. Bhatt, Medical Jurist, Referral Hospital, Chittorgarh, who noticed a penetrating wound I x x abdominal deep on his body. Lapotomy was done. Blood was found in the abdominal cavity. Intestinal wall was injured. As per the opinion of the doctor the injury was dangerous to life and was caused by a sharp edged weapon. Upon completion of investigation, the accused was challaned in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh, who committed him to the Court of Sessions for trial. The accused was charged under section 307, I. P. C. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. ( 3 ) AFTER trial, the learned Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid for the offence under section 326, I. P. C. to four years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default of payment of fine to further R. I. for four months. ( 3 ) AFTER trial, the learned Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid for the offence under section 326, I. P. C. to four years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default of payment of fine to further R. I. for four months. The learned Sessions Judge by placing reliance on the testimony of Rameshwar, P. W. 2; Ram Prasad, P. W. 3; Jagdish Chandra, P. W. 4; Kailash Chandra, P. W. 5 and Dr. R. D. Bhatt, P. W. 6, has held that it was the accused who caused a grievous injury by a sharp edged weapon to Rameshwar. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Addi. Sessions Judge. Chittorgarh, the appellant has preferred the present appeal through Jail. As the accused was un-represented, Shri Virendra J. Phadke was appointed Amicus Curiae to argue the case for the accused. ( 4 ) I have heard Shri Virendra J. Phadke, Amicus-Curiae for the accused-appellant and Shri Vimal Mathur, Public Prosecutor for the State. ( 5 ) THE fact that Rameshwar received a penetrating wound by a sharp edged weapon in his stomach, is not disputed. The fact that the said injury was caused to Rameshwar by the accused appellant stands proved by the evidence of Rameshwar himself. I have been taken through the statement of the injured and I concur with the finding of the learned Sessions Judge that he is a trustworthy straightforward witness. He himself being an injured was the best witness for the prosecution. His evidence inspires confidence. There is no possibility of any mistaken identity also as the occurrence took place at 7. 45 in the morning. Although, the learned Addi. Sessions Judge has placed reliance on the evidence of other witnesses, namely, Ram Prasad, Jagdish Chandra and Kailash Chandra but I do not propose to act upon their evidence as they had reached the spot after the occurrence was over. To my mind, the evidence of Rameshwar alone was sufficient to come to the conclusion that the injury on the body of Rameshwar was caused by the accused. The evidence of Rameshwar is fully corroborated by the evidence of Dr. R. D. Bhatt, who found the penetrating wound in his stomach. ( 6 ) SHRI Phadke has next argued that the prosecution has failed to establish that the injury sustained by the accused was grievous in nature. The evidence of Rameshwar is fully corroborated by the evidence of Dr. R. D. Bhatt, who found the penetrating wound in his stomach. ( 6 ) SHRI Phadke has next argued that the prosecution has failed to establish that the injury sustained by the accused was grievous in nature. According to him the offence against the accused would not travel beyond section 324, I. P. C. I do not agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant. The wound on the stomach of Rameshwar was deep enough to reach his intestinal wall. The intestinal wall was injured, blood was found in the abdominal cavity, which had RAJASTHAN to be closed to stop further bleeding. The doctor has described the injury as dangerous to life. In my view, the injury has rightly been held to be grievous and the conviction of the appellant for the offence under section 326, I. P. C. cannot be held to be legally bad. ( 7 ) ON the question of sentence, the learned counsel has urged that the ends of justice will be fully met if the sentence already undergone by him is held sufficient. According to him the accused has already undergone 22 monthst imprisonment. ( 8 ) I have given my earnest consideration to this question. The occurrence took place all of a sudden. It was not pre-meditated. The learned Sessions Judge has himself said that the injury was not caused with any intention to cause death. Only a single blow was struck to the injured. Taking all these circumstances into consideration in my view a sentence of three years and a fine would meet the ends of justice. ( 9 ) ACCORDINGLY, the appeal is partly allowed, the conviction of the appellant for the offence under section 326, I. P. C. is maintained but the sentence awarded to him by the learned Addi. Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, is reduced to three yearst R. I. and a fine of Rs. 250/- and in default of payment of fine to further R. I. for four months. Appeal partly allowed. .