Judgment T.P.Garg (1.) THIS appeal by Jhabboo, Rameshwar son of Raghoo, Rameshwar son of Jhabboo, and Bhagwan Dass, accused, is directed against their conviction under Section 324/34, I.P.C. and sentence to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two years each, passed by Sri Krishna Kumar, VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur, vide his judgment dated 17.11.1979. (2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under : On 8.7.1977 at about 6.00 a.m. all the accused in furtherance of their common intention caused hurt to Onkar Singh, son of Gori Lal, P.W. Jhabboo and Rameshwar son of Raghoo, accused, were armed with spears, while Rameshwar son of Jhabboo and Bhagwan Dass, accused, were armed with lathis. The motive for the occurrence is said to be that a day before the present occurrence there was an altercation between the parties over the turn of water in the field. On the day of occurrence, in the morning time, Onkar Singh, P.W. had gone to the house of Balwant in order to borrow his plough. While he was with Balwant, all the accused, armed with their respective weapons, came there and surrounded Onkar Singh, P.W. Jhabboo and Rameshwar son of Raghoo, accused, gave him spear blows, while Rameshwar son of Jhabboo and Bhagwan Das, accused, gave him lathi blows. Thereafter, the accused ran away with their respective weapons. A case under Section 307, I.P.C. was registered against the accused on the report of Onkar Singh, P.W. The injured was medically examined and also X- Rayed. The Medical Officer found as many as 10 injuries on his person including six injuries caused by pointed weapon and four injuries by blunt weapon. All the injuries were, however, simple. (3.) THE accused were tried for an offence under Section 307/34, I.P.C. THE prosecution examined as many as six P.Ws. including Onkar Singh, injured, as P.W. 1, Balwant, an eye witness, as P.W. 2, Matroo, another eye-witness, as P.W. 3, Dr. P. N. Rastogi, Medical Officer, who examined Onkar Singh, as P.W. 4, Karam Singh, Sub-Inspector of Police, who investigated the case, as P.W. 5 and Head Constable, Hardwari Lal, who recorded the F.I.R., as P.W. 6. In their statements under Section 313, Cr. P.C. the accused have denied the allegations and have stated that it was a false case against them. In their statements under Section 313, Cr. P.C. the accused have denied the allegations and have stated that it was a false case against them. Jhabboo, accused, has, however, added that his sons had been arrested in the market about which he made a report and subsequently he has been falsely implicated on account of the aforesaid grudge. THE accused did not lead any evidence in their defence, except two documents. (4.) THE learned trial Judge believing the prosecution version and disbelieving that of the accused held them guilty under Section 324/34, I.P.C. and not under Section 307/34, I.P.C, convicted them thereunder, and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for two years each, vide the impugned judgment against which the present appeal has been filed. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that he was not challenging the conviction of any of the accused under Section 324/34, I.P.C. He has only prayed for reduction in sentence on the ground that the accused have been undergoing the ordeal of a very long trial lasting over a period of 18 years. The occurrence took place on 8.7.1977 and the trial lasted for more than about two years. The accused were convicted and sentenced on 17.11.1979 and since then about 16 years have elapsed when this appeal is pending in this Court. According to him, the accused have been undergoing acute mental agony and pain on account of pendency of this appeal and so a lenient view be taken in the matter of sentence. He has further submitted that Bhagwan Dass, accused, was about 19 years of age, while Jhabboo was 45 years of age, Rameshwar son of Raghoo was 30 years of age, and Rameshwar son of Jhabboo was 25 years of age at the time of occurrence. Further that all the injuries found on the person of Onkar Singh, P.W., were simple and the entire occurrence took place on the spur of the moment with no premeditated plan. He has not challenged the conviction on merits. Accordingly, the conviction of the appellants is maintained. (5.) EVEN otherwise, the conviction of the appellants is based on thorough appraisal and appreciation of the entire evidence on record and is thus well- founded. From the sworn testimony of Onkar Singh, P.W. 1, Balwant, P.W. 2, and Matroo, P.W. 3, the offence is proved against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the conviction of the appellants is maintained. (5.) EVEN otherwise, the conviction of the appellants is based on thorough appraisal and appreciation of the entire evidence on record and is thus well- founded. From the sworn testimony of Onkar Singh, P.W. 1, Balwant, P.W. 2, and Matroo, P.W. 3, the offence is proved against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The eye-witness account rendered by these witnesses is consistent with the Medical evidence of Dr. P. N. Rastogi, P.W. 4, who examined the injured in the hospital on that very day, soon after the occurrence, at about 11.30 a.m. and found as many as 10 injuries, vide his report Ext. Ka-2. The defence version pleaded by the accused is in the nature of an excuse and has not been substantiated by any material on record. The same has been rightly rejected by the trial Court. The conviction of the accused is, thus, maintained even on merits. (6.) AS regards sentence, the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants has considerable merit. The accused have been undergoing the ordeal of a very long trial lasting over a period of more than 18 years. Bhagwan Dass has remained in jail for a period of more than three weeks. Similarly, other co-accused have also remained in jail for similar terms. I, therefore, find that the ends of Justice will be amply met if the sentence awarded to them is reduced to the period already undergone and a fine of Rs. 750 is imposed on each of them, or in default of payment of fine the defaulter to further undergo R.I. for three months. Order accordingly. The entire amount of fine, if realised, be paid to Onkar Singh, P.W., injured, by way of compensation. On the request of the learned counsel, the appellants are given three months' time to deposit the amount of fine in the trial Court, failing which they be taken into custody to undergo the sentence awarded to them for default of payment of fine. With the aforesaid modification in sentence, the present appeal fails and is dismissed. Appeal dismissed and sentence modified.