DEEPAK MISRA, J. ( 1 ) JOHN Steinteck, the nobel, laureate wrote thus :-"the deviding line between hunger and anger is very thin. " True it is keen demands of appetite substantially governs men's actions. A hungry man looses control over his thinking ability, rational approach and sense of proportion and indulges in uncalled for acts which under normal circumstances he would not have conceived of. His action become an embodiment of insensitivity of finer human emotions. Here is a sad story where a man of 32 years, when informed about non-availability of food forgetting the relationship and abdicating his rational thoughts as well as human considerations, he assaulted his paternal grand-mother, a feeble old lady, who succumbed to the injuries. ( 2 ) THE prosecution story, as unfurled, is that on 26-12-93 in Village Tokni, the deceased Ojebai, Kamubai (PW-4) and Guddi alias Manotabai (PW-5) had finished their dinner and were in their house. At about 9 p. m. the accused came and asked Guddi for food. Reply came from Ojebai that there was no food at home. Blood rushed into the hand of the accused and he assaulted Kamubai, his mother and Guddi, his sister. Thereafter he brought out an axe and assaulted Ojebai on her head, chest, back and the right hand. Kamubai went to the house of Roshanlal (PW-2) and informed him about the incident. Roshanlal came to the house of Renubai and found Ojebai was lying dead. Next day, Roshanlal, Hari (PW-3) and some others came to the house of Renubai who narrated the entire incident. Thereafter, an FIR (Ex. P-2) was lodged at Navgaon Police Station by PW-4. The investigating agency did 'panchnama' of the dead-body (Ex. P-6 ). The dead-body was sent for post-mortem. Renubai and Guddi were also sent for medical examination. There medical examination reports are (Ex. P-13) and (Ex. P-14 ). The accused led to the discovery of the axe which was seized under (Ex. P-4 ). The sample earth from the spot and the clothes kept on the bed of the deceased were sent for chemical examination. After completing all other formalities, chargesheet was placed before the competent Court under Sections 302/323 of the Indian Penal Code and the said Court in its turn committed the matter to the Court of Session at Chhindwara, forming the subject-matter of S. T. No. 62/95. After completing all other formalities, chargesheet was placed before the competent Court under Sections 302/323 of the Indian Penal Code and the said Court in its turn committed the matter to the Court of Session at Chhindwara, forming the subject-matter of S. T. No. 62/95. ( 3 ) THE accused abjured his guilt and pleaded false implication. It is his further plea that he has been implicated falsely due to pre-existing dispute with regard to ancestral property. ( 4 ) TO substantiate the charge against the accused the prosecution examined 10 witnesses. PW-1 Shivlal is uncle of the accused who has been declared hostile; PW-2, Roshanlal who had arrived immediately at the place of occurrence; PW-3 is Hari; PW-4, Renubai is the mother of the accused; PW-6 is Guddi, the sister of the accused; PWs-5, 6, 7 and 8 are the formal witnesses; PW-9 is the Sub-Inspector attached to Navgaon Police Station who had conducted investigation; and PW-10 is Dr. N. R. Azad who had conducted the post-mortem examination. Apart from adducing oral evidence the prosecution also marked number of documents in furtherance of its case. ( 5 ) ON consideration of the oral, documentary and medical evidence on record the learned Sessions Judge came to hold that the accused had assaulted his grand-mother, mother and sister. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, he convicted the accused under Section 304-II of the Indian Penal Code for the assault on Ojebai and under Section 323, IPC in relation to assault on PWs-4 and 5, the mother and sister and sentenced him for seven years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 304-II and for six months imprisonment under Section 323, IPC, with a further stipulation that both the sentences would run concurrently. ( 6 ) KU. Kiran Mehta, learned counsel for the appellant impugning the aforesaid judgment has contended that the Court below has erred in law in placing implicit reliance on the testimony of PWs-4 and 5, though, there are irreconcilable discrepancies which cannot be brushed aside. She has also canvassed that PW-1, the paternal uncle of the accused has not supported the version of the prosecution and on that score the prosecution story should have been disbelieved. She has also canvassed that PW-1, the paternal uncle of the accused has not supported the version of the prosecution and on that score the prosecution story should have been disbelieved. It is her further submission that in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the sentence of seven years of imprisonment as impugned by the Court below is execssive. Mr. Dipak Okhade, learned panel Advocate for the State has supported the impugned judgment for the reasons indicated therein. He has further proponed that the Court below has rightly accepted the version of PWs-4 and 5 who are no other than the mother and sister of the accused, and as they had no axe to grind against him their evidence has to be given due weightage. ( 7 ) TO appreciate the rival contention raised at par, I have perused the impugned judgment with utmost anxiety and closely gone through the evidence on record with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties. The learned trial Judge after referring to the evidence of PW-10. Dr. Azad, who had conducted the post-mortem examination has observed that the number of injuries found on the dead-body of the deceased, were sufficient to cause death. This conclusion of the Court below is not seriously disputed. The Court below has placed heavy reliance on the evidence of PWs-4 and 5. He has also strongly relied upon (Ex. P-4), the memorandum under which the weapon used was recovered at the instance of the accused. On a close scrutiny of the evidence of PW-4, the mother of the accused, it is already perceptible that the accused had assaulted with an axe on the head and other parts of the body of Ojebai and there was prefuse bleeding. She has also stated that Ojebai died inside the house because of the injuries sustained by her. She has remained embodied in her version. As far as her information to Shivlal, Roshanlal, Vinti and Hari is concerned she has deposed with clarity. She has proved the FIR and has remained unshaken in the cross-examination. She has also explained the reasons for not lodging the FIR in the night itself. PW-5 is the sister of the accused. She has narrated vividly with regard to the altercation between the deceased and the accused relating to non-availability of food at home. She has proved the FIR and has remained unshaken in the cross-examination. She has also explained the reasons for not lodging the FIR in the night itself. PW-5 is the sister of the accused. She has narrated vividly with regard to the altercation between the deceased and the accused relating to non-availability of food at home. She has also deposed that the accused had assaulted her and her mother. She has clearly stated with regard to the assault on Ojebai. Nothing has been elicited in the cross-examination to discard her testimony. There is no reason on the part of the mother and the sister, who have no axe to grind against the accused to implicate him. There is no suggestion to any of the witnesses that there has been some dispute with regard to the landed property and, therefore, these two witnesses have implicated him to gain advantage. In fact, suggestion is to effect that she had already gone to the flour grinding machine and there she sustained injuries and her life spork was extinguished. On a perusal of their testimony I find that it is unimpeachable and absolutely trustworhty. Quite apart from above, there is material on record that the accused has led to the discovery of the weapon used in the crime. The weapon on the question was hidden on the slope of the house. There is evidence on record that he had given recovery in presence of witnesses. Appreciating the evidence of PWs-4 and 5 juxtaposed with leading to discovery of the weapon used there is no reason to disbelieve the version propounded by the prosecution. On a perusal of the materials on record and the aforesaid evidence I am of the considered view that the conclusions arrived at by the learned trial Judge has to have the stamp of approval of the Court. ( 8 ) NOW to the question of sentence, Ku. Kiran Mehta, learned counsel for the appellant has seriously pressed that the appellant should not have been sentenced for seven years RI and the said sentence is quite excessive. She has further highlighted that the appellant was not given food and therefore, he got into an emotional fury and assaulted. ( 8 ) NOW to the question of sentence, Ku. Kiran Mehta, learned counsel for the appellant has seriously pressed that the appellant should not have been sentenced for seven years RI and the said sentence is quite excessive. She has further highlighted that the appellant was not given food and therefore, he got into an emotional fury and assaulted. She has tried to impress upon this Court that the appellant belongs to backward area of the State, where finer sentiments have not yet been cultivated, hence he committed the crime without any intention or motive. As factual scenario is potrayed by the prosectuion the accused assaulted the sister and mother. There was altercation with regard to the food. The state of hunger worked as a catalyst giving rise to uncontrollable anger. The special backdrop, the milieu to which the appellant belongs, the peculiar facts and circumstances in which the crime had occurred, the absence of criminal antecedents of the accused are certain aspects to be taken into consideration while imposing sentence. On overall consideration of the factual matrix, I am of the considered view a sentence of five years RI for the offence under Section 304-II would be meet and proper. Accordingly, the custodial sentence of seven years for the aforesaid offence is reduced to five years. The sentence for the offence under Section 323, IPC remains unaltered. Both these sentences are to run councurrently. ( 9 ) WITH the aforesaid modfication in sentence the appeal is dismissed. Order accordingly. .