Judgment Y. R. MEENA, J. ( 1 ) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Sriganganagar dated 6-7-81 whereby lie had affirmed the conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioner by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate under S. 326, I. P. C. ( 2 ) THE necessary facts to be noticed in short are that on 24-4-1978 at 11. 30 p. m. one Hansraj lodged a report at Police Station Ghoomarwali to the effect that while the complainant was working in the field of Malsingh and accused Rajaram was working in the field of Balbirsingh, brother of Rajaram; Rajaram gave 6-7 Kassia blows at the hands, shoulders and head of the complaint Hansraj. Hansraj raised alarm and that attracted Dhoularam (P. W. 3 ). Therefore, injured Hansraj was brought at his house by Doularam, Bhagirath and Kasiram. On the basis of this information, a First Information Report was registered under S. 307, I. P. C. After usual investigation, challan was filed in the Court for the offence under S. 307, I. P. C. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Ganganagar. After hearing the arguments, learned Sessions (Judge) was of the view that the case is not made out under S. 307, I. P. C. but it is made out under S. 326, I. P. C. only, therefore, he sent the case back to the C. J. M. for trial. During trial prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses. Statement of accused was recorded under S. 313, Cr. P. C. ( 3 ) CONSIDERING the material on record, learned C. J. M. has convicted the accuse persons for the offence under S. 326, I. P. C. and sentenced them to undergo 3 years R. I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 200. 00 each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one months. R. I. ( 4 ) BEING aggrieved, petitioners carried the matter in appeal in the Court of Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal, hence this revision to this Court. ( 5 ) HEARD Mr. T. S. Champawat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Hemant Choudhary, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the entire material on record, specially the Statement of P. W. 3 Dhoularam, who is an independent witness and statement of injured Hansraj. ( 5 ) HEARD Mr. T. S. Champawat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Hemant Choudhary, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the entire material on record, specially the Statement of P. W. 3 Dhoularam, who is an independent witness and statement of injured Hansraj. I also perused the F. I. R. inquiry report Ex. P-7, X-ray, report Ex. P-6 and Recovery memo Ex. P-15. ( 6 ) CONSIDERING the material on record, I find no, reason to interfere in the concurrent finding of the Courts below that accused petitioner-Rajaram is guilty of the offence under S. 326, I. P. C. hence, his conviction under S. 326, I. P. C. is upheld. ( 7 ) THE offence was committed as back in the year 1978. There is no previous enmity between the petitioner and the injured Hansraj. Considering the fact that this is the only offence the petitioner has committed so far and also the gravity of the offence, it would not be appropriate to send him in jail after lapse of 14 years from the date of commission of offence. Hence, I would prefer to give him an opportunity to reform and rehabiliate in the society. ( 8 ) IN the result, the revision petition is partly allowed. The conviction under S. 326, I. P. C. is upheld. Sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioner. As the sentence has been reduced, to the period already undergone, I enhance fine to Rs. 3000. 00. The petitioner is directed to pay aforesaid fine within 3 months from the date of this order. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner is to undergo six months R. I. , when fine is realised, then, out of that Rs. 2000. 00 be paid to the injured Hansraj. Order accordingly.