JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of the Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Alwar, by which he has convicted the appellant under Sections 394, 307 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 394, IPC. He has further been convicted to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's simple imprisonment under Section 307, IPC. The appellant has also been convicted for 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further 9 months simple imprisonment under Section 326, IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution as given out in the parcha-bayan/written report Ex.R13 lodged by PW/6 Baldeo Singh is to the effect that on 10.1.1992, he was approached by a man in the night and he hired a taxi bearing No. DNH/6730 for reaching him from Delhi to Alwar. The description has been given therein that he was tall, of dark complexion, wearing chain and was a Sardar. It has also been stated that it was disclosed to him that the said man had to go to Alwar to meet one of his relatives who was ailing. The informant accordingly started with the accused for Alwar and, on the way of Ramgarh to Govindgarh, he was asked by the accused to stop as he wanted to urinate. Accordingly, he stopped the car on the way and both of them went to attend the call of nature. In the meantime, he saw that suddenly the man started giving beating to him and caused injuries on his head, mouth and hand. It has also been given out in the parcha-bayan/written report that the taxi, which was a Maruti Van was hired by that man at the rate of Rs. 3/- per kilo-metre It has still further been stated that he started from Delhi and went to Majnu Ka Teela, were he stayed for five minutes. Thereafter he stated that since the ladies had gone with some other relatives, both of them started together. The informant has given out the No. of Maruti Van as DNH/6730. 3/- per kilo-metre It has still further been stated that he started from Delhi and went to Majnu Ka Teela, were he stayed for five minutes. Thereafter he stated that since the ladies had gone with some other relatives, both of them started together. The informant has given out the No. of Maruti Van as DNH/6730. The report further states that the man forcibly went away with the Maruti Van and the time which has been disclosed by him is around 4.00 a.m. It has also been claimed by him in the Parcha-bayan that if the Sardar, as described by him, is produced, he would be in a position of identify him. An FIR was registered on the basis of this parcha-bayan for offences under Sections 394 and 307, IPC. 3. The police, on the basis of this written report, started investigation and arrested the appellant from the house of his sister at Alwar, which was his destination and recovered one Khanjar and Maruti Van No. DNH 6730. After investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused-appellant for the offences under Sections 394, 307 and 328, IPC. After completing the necessary formalities of commitment proceedings, the matter was transferred to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Alwar, where the trial of the case took place. 4. The defence of the accused-appellant is a complete denial of his involvement in the alleged incident and, therefore, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. The prosecution in support of its case examined 10- witnesses and also exhibited some documents. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313, Cr.PC, where he denied the prosecution case. No defence witness was produced in support of the case of the defence. 6. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Alwar essentially relied on the evidence of the information Baldeo Singh Pw/6 and Ashok Kumar PW/9. The informant in his deposition supported the entire report which had been stated by him in the parcha-bayan and there is no improvement or change in the version from what he has stated in the parcha- bayan. The evidence of the informant has been corroborated by PW/9 Ashok Kumar, which has been relied upon by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. This witness is a taxi- driver who was first of all approached by the accused at Delhi for reaching him to Alwar. The evidence of the informant has been corroborated by PW/9 Ashok Kumar, which has been relied upon by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. This witness is a taxi- driver who was first of all approached by the accused at Delhi for reaching him to Alwar. it has been stated by him that since his car/taxi was not available with him, therefore he asked him to meet the informant Baldeo Singh who readily agreed to go to Alwar. Accordingly, they both started for Alwar and later on he learnt that the alleged incident took place. It has also been stated by him that when he came to know about the fact that the informant had been injured, he went to meet him in the hospital, where he noticed that the informant Baldeo Singh was severely injured. He had sustained injuries on his head and also his left wrist had been amputated. One of the fingers of the right hand as also the wrist of the right hand was severely injured. It has been noticed by the Court below that the appellant was not put on Tl parade and the alleged weapon has also not been produced as the same was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, the report of which had not been produced. But, in the opinion of the trial Court, the same is not enough to discard the evidence of the aforesaid two witnesses which has been held to be unimpeachable. Accordingly, the appellant was convicted, as already stated hereinabove. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant Shri Naqvi has essentially tried to substantiate the plea of the defence that the implication of the appellant is palpably false and that the commission of offence regarding which the written report was lodged may have taken place in some other manner. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to the evidence of the informant and also of the other prosecution witnesses. 8. We have heard the learned counsel on the points which have been urged regarding false implication of the appellant and have also gone through the evidence of the prosecution witnesses which has been assailed by the learned counsel for the appellant. 9. 8. We have heard the learned counsel on the points which have been urged regarding false implication of the appellant and have also gone through the evidence of the prosecution witnesses which has been assailed by the learned counsel for the appellant. 9. The redeeming feature of the prosecution case which attracts the attention of this Court is the fact that the accused-appellant was arrested soon after the incident from the house of his sister, which fact corroborates the informant's case and other prosecution witnesses' version that the accused-appellant, in fact, had started from Delhi in order to meet his aiding sister. The fact that he has been arrested from the house of his sister reinforces the prosecution case that the appellant had started along with the informant from Delhi to meet his sister, as has been given out by the prosecution witnesses and The incident took place in the manner alleged. 10. The second aspect of the matter is that the Maruti Van which is alleged to have been snatched by the informant has also been recovered from the house of his sister at Alwar. Therefore, there can be no doubt that the evidence of the prosecution in so far as the taking away of the Maruti Van forcibly is concerned, it cannot be doubted at all. The only lacuna according to the defence case is that the Khanjar alleged to have been used by the accused was not produced by the prosecution. But we agree with the reasoning of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge that, although, this goes against the prosecution that the weapon has not been produced, but still this cannot be a ground enough to disbelieve the evidence of the two important witnesses-PW 13 and PW 9 whose version is proved by the recovery of the van at the place of the appellant's sister and the injuries sustained by the informant. 11. The fact that the informant has been injured in the manner as alleged by him also cannot be doubted as the same has been fully corroborated by the medical evidence as also the oral evidence of the Doctor. The version of the informant therefore that he lost his left hand and one of the fingers in the right hand as also injuries on the wrist of his right hand speaks for itself that he was injured in the manner as alleged by him. The version of the informant therefore that he lost his left hand and one of the fingers in the right hand as also injuries on the wrist of his right hand speaks for itself that he was injured in the manner as alleged by him. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the finding arrived at by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge in regard to the commission of the offence in the manner alleged by the informant in his parcha-bayan which stands corroborated by other prosecution witnesses and the medical evidence. 12. We have also considered whether the charge alleged against the accused-appellant under Section 394, IPC is made out or not in view of the averment of the informant in his parcha-bayana to the effect that the taxi was hired by the accused-appellant at the rate of Rs. 3/- per kilometre which may be an indication that the taxi was, in fact, hired in order to reach the place of his sister and, in fact, he had no intention to rob him. But from the fact that on the way to Alwar, this taxi was forcibly taken away by the accused-appellant which was subsequently recovered from the house of his sister, it cannot be doubted that the offence under Section 394, IPC is clearly made out against the appellant. We therefore, maintain the conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 394, IPC, but in so far as the conviction under Section 307, IPC is concerned, we acquit him of this offence for the reason that the oral as well as the medical evidence show that the injuries sustained by the informant were on non-vltal part of the body. Therefore, the intention of the accused- appellant could not have been to kill him and, it is quite certain that the intention of the accused-appellant was to take away the taxi and also to teach him a lesson in the scuffle which may have taken place between the two on account of the dispute about the fare. But, in so far as the conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 326. IPC is concerned, we have no doubt in our mind that the offence under Section 326, IPC is clearly made out as the informant Baldeo Singh has lost his right hand upto the wrist and has also lost one finger of his left hand. But, in so far as the conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 326. IPC is concerned, we have no doubt in our mind that the offence under Section 326, IPC is clearly made out as the informant Baldeo Singh has lost his right hand upto the wrist and has also lost one finger of his left hand. These injuries by no means can be said to be simple injuries. The informant has clearly become disabled and handicapped on account of these injuries. The conviction of accused- appellant therefore under Section 326, IPC is maintained. 13. In so far as the sentence awarded to the accused- appellant is concerned, we reduce the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to him under Section 394, IPC and of ten years rigorous imprisonment under Section 326, IPC to a period of five years on each count especially for the reason that the accused-appellant appears to have been in a state of mind where he was anxious to reach his sister at Alwar as she was lying ill and, it appears that a quarrel took place between the two on the way regarding the fare and the appellant committed the crime in the heat of the moment, but without any preplanning. But in circumstances, we are still conscious of the fact that the ends of justice would not be met unless the informant Baldeo Singh, who was a taxi-driver and was earning his livelihood by using his hands has become permanently disabled. Therefore, in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Hari Kishan & State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh, ( AIR 1988 SC 2127 ) , wherein it has been laid down that the victim may be adequately compensated in terms of the money in appropriate cases, we think, it is a fit case where such compensation should be awarded. Therefore, we enhance the sentence of fine from Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- under Section 394, IPC and from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- under Section 326, IPC. In all, the fine to be paid by the accused-appellant would be Rs. 20,000/- which, on payment, will be handed over to the informant Baldeo Singh. It is made clear that in the event of failure to pay this amount, the accused-appellant shall undergo further period of rigorous imprisonment of one year under each count. 10,000/- under Section 326, IPC. In all, the fine to be paid by the accused-appellant would be Rs. 20,000/- which, on payment, will be handed over to the informant Baldeo Singh. It is made clear that in the event of failure to pay this amount, the accused-appellant shall undergo further period of rigorous imprisonment of one year under each count. The conviction and sentence of the accused appellant stands modified as stated hereinabove. *******