A. R. TIWARI, J. ( 1 ) THIS criminal appeal, presented under Section 374, of the Cr. P. C. is directed against the judgment dated 26-2-93 rendered by the Ist Addl. Sessions Judge, Khargone in S. T. No. 18/92 thereby convicting the appellant Deba under Section 323, and the appellant Pandu under Section 323/34 of the IPC and sentencing each of them to suffer R. I. of three months. ( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that on 29-6-91, Chhigya and his brother Dhulia had gone to look after certain articles of Kedar in the field of Chigya situated in the village Hamirpura. One Remalsingh was already present there. Pandu came there. Deba followed him. The appellant Pandu caught hold of Remalsingh and Deba inflicted injuries on him. The matter was reported to the Police. On completion of the investigation the charge-sheet was filed under Section 307 IPC. In the course of time, the case was committed for trial. The appellant Deba was charged under Section 307, IPC whereas the appellant Pandu was charged under Section 307/34, IPC. Deba was further charged under Section 324, IPC to which the appellants pleaded not guilty. On evaluation of the evidence, the appellants were convicted and sentenced as above. Aggrieved by this judgment, the appellants have preferred this appeal. ( 3 ) I have heard Shri P. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Phadke, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. ( 4 ) SHRI Gupta submitted as under : (A) The evidence adduced by the prosecution is undependable and as such the conclusion of guilt is not on firm foundation. (b) In the alternative, the appellants deserve to be released on Probation of Offenders Act. 4a. PW-3 Remalsingh is the injured Person. He has testified against the appellants. The version of Remalsing is supported by PW-5 Dhulia and PW-4 Chhigya who are brothers. PW-2 Dr. Arsuliya has deposed about the presence of the injuries on the person of PW-3 Remalsingh. This witness, however, stated that the weapon attributed to the appellant Deba cannot cause the injury found by him. On this statement, the counsel for the appellants has tried to argue that the story of the prosecution is meretricious. PW-2 Dr. Arsuliya has deposed about the presence of the injuries on the person of PW-3 Remalsingh. This witness, however, stated that the weapon attributed to the appellant Deba cannot cause the injury found by him. On this statement, the counsel for the appellants has tried to argue that the story of the prosecution is meretricious. However, in my view the ocular version is found to be quite truthful and the opinion by the doctor is vague and incapable of dislodging the ocular version. In the result, I find that the appellants have been rightly held guilty under Section 323, and 323/34, of the Indian Penal Code. ( 5 ) THIS brings me to the question of quantum of sentence. Several factors are required to be considered for determination of the sentence. In fact Judge Thesdore Levin specifies the following questions which the Judge should consider in the determination of a sentence -"was the crime against person or property ? If the former, did it endanger the life of the victim or leave permanent effects upon his general welfare. ? Was it premeditated or was it the result of an impulse arising from a fit of passion. ? Does the background of the offender reveal a pattern of transgressions of the law ? Are the circumstances such as to indicate that there was no full appreciation of the nature and significance of the behaviour which constituted the offence ? Are the offender's emotional and mental characteristics, his family, ties, and his business interests such as to offer encouragement and hope for his reformation, or is he likely again to collide with the rules of living established by society ? Does the individual before the Court, having regard to the public interests, require punishment greater than the impact upon him of the conviction itself. Is he an individual upon whom a term of imprisonment may reasonably be expected to have a corrective effect. ? Will irreparable damage result to the family group if he is removed from it. ? Is there any indication that a severe sentence will act as a deterrent upon others who might be prone to commit crime ? ( 6 ) APPLYING the aforesaid questions to the facts as placed on record, I am satisfied that there is room for taking a lenient view in this matter and for softening the rigour of the sentence. Is there any indication that a severe sentence will act as a deterrent upon others who might be prone to commit crime ? ( 6 ) APPLYING the aforesaid questions to the facts as placed on record, I am satisfied that there is room for taking a lenient view in this matter and for softening the rigour of the sentence. ( 7 ) THE modern trend leans towards reformation rather than retribution. It is not disputed before me that by now the appellants have already undergone jail sentence of about three weeks. They are said to be belonging to backward class. There is no load of bad antecedents against the appellants. The counsel submits that the lenient view will enable the appellants to turn new leaf in life. ( 8 ) CONSIDERING the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by sending the appellants back to jail to suffer the remaining period of sentence. ( 9 ) IN the result, this appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining the conviction, the sentence as passed by the trial Court is set aside and instead the appellants are sentenced to suffer the imprisonment already undergone by them. ( 10 ) THE appellants were arrested on nonbailable warrants issued by this Court by order dated 1-12-93. They were produced today in this Court in proper custody. They were remanded to jail. As the sentence is reduced to the term already undergone by them, it is ordered that they shall be set at liberty forthwith in case they are not wanted in connection with any other offence. ( 11 ) FURTHER proceedings as a result of absence are directed to be dropped. The record of the Court below is directed to be returned. Order accordingly. .