N. P. SINGH, J. ( 1 ) THE appellants along with four others were tried, for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 of (he Indian Penal Code by the Ilird Addi. Sessions Judge, Sagar, in S. T. No. 221/90 for assaulting complainant Rajesh (PW 16) on 11. 3. 1990 at 1. 00 p. m. in Manorama Colony Sagar, on account of old enmity. ( 2 ) THE Trial Court, on consideration of the evidence convicted the appellants, under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced them to undergo R. I. for seven years while acquitted the other co-accused. ( 3 ) SHRI A. Usman, learned Counsel for the appellants, has contended that complainant Rajesh (PW 16) was examined by Dr. C. K. Dubey (PW 8) who found six injuries on his person. The injury Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were neat. the chest and liver. The complainant was, operated upon of his injuries by Dr. R. C. Agarwal (PW 9), Surgeon of Tilly Hospital, Sagar. But there is no medical evidence that the injuries caused to the complainant were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause his death. The ingredients of Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is, therefore, not attracted. Reliance was placed in the case of Pashora Singh and another v. State of Punjab. ( 4 ) DR. C. K. Dubey (PW 8) who examined the complainant Rajesh (PW 16) has opined that the injury Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were near the chest and liver of the complainant but there is no medical evidence that any vital organ or the complainant was got damaged. There is also no medical evidence that the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death of the co m p Ia in ant. ( 5 ) IT is, thus, obvious from the medical evidence of Dr. C. H. Dubey (PW 8) and Dr. R. C. Agarwal (PW 9) that there was complete lack of intention on the part of the appellants to cause death of the complainant. ( 5 ) IT is, thus, obvious from the medical evidence of Dr. C. H. Dubey (PW 8) and Dr. R. C. Agarwal (PW 9) that there was complete lack of intention on the part of the appellants to cause death of the complainant. In the case of Pashora Singh (Supra) the Apex Court altered the conviction of the appellants, under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code into one under Section 326 of me Indian Penal Code and reduced the sentence of imprisonment of the appellants to the period already undergone by them, when the appellants were alleged to have inflicted injury on the head of the deceased which was described as dangerous to life. ( 6 ) IN the instant case, it however, appears that out of six injuries caused to the complainant only injury No. 1 was grievous in nature but there is no medical evidence to show that the injury No. 1 was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death of the complainant. The intention to cause death of the complainant is completely lacking in the instant case therefore, the conviction and sentence of the appellants under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be sustained. The conviction and sentence of the appellants is altered to one under Section 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants have remained in custody for about two years and six months and they have also undergone the agony of protracted trial. I think the substantial ends of justice would be met if the appellants are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. ( 7 ) WITH this modification in the conviction and sentence of the appellants, the appeal is allowed in part. Appeal allowed in part. .