Judgment MOHD. YAMIN, J. ( 1 ) ALL the five convicts preferred these appeals against their conviction recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh on 30-3-1978 under various Sections of Indian Penal Code including 302 read with 149, IPC for which they were sentenced to life imprisonment. During the pendency of appeal, appellant-Veer Singh expired and consequently his appeal abated. ( 2 ) FACTS giving rise to these appeals may be narrated in brief. The complainant party and the accused-appellants were labourers. They used to dig earth. They were living in different tents, Kashmir Singh and Kesra used to bring liquor and sell the same to the labourers, Kashmir Singh, Vazir Singh, Laxman Singh and Mehanga Singh used to object. It is alleged that at about 10. 00 p. m. on 23-2-1977 Laxman Singh who used to live with Kashmir Singh, Mehanga Singh and Vazir Singh went to the tent of the accused- appellants in order to demand the balance of amount of his wages which was only Rs. 15/ -. He demanded the amount from Kesra who paid Rs. 10/- and refused to pay the balance. Laxman Singh, insisted the demand of balance amount of Rs. 5/- which was the amount of his hard earned wages. Then all the accused-appellants started abusing. Laxman Singh requested them not to call bad names. All the five accused-appellants came out armed with different weapons. They wanted to assault Laxman Singh but he ran away towards his tent. When he was running, Magar Singh inflicted injury on his wrist and finger. There was much hue and cry. Thereupon Kashmir Singh and Mehanga Singh came out of the tent of Laxman Singh and tried to rescue him. Magar Singh and Kesra started assaulting him with gandasi. Kashmir Singh fell down and then rest of the accused persons assaulted him with lathi and iron pipe. Mehanga Singh was also assaulted. Indiscriminate assaults were made on Kashmir Singh. Thereafter they dragged him to the tent of Laxman Singh. By that time Laxman Singh, Mehanga Singh and Vazir Singh had escaped and were hiding themselves. During the night nobody came out of the tents but in the morning of 24-2-1977 at about 8. 00 a. m. Mehanga Singh informed people in village Talawara Jheel to which Kashmir Singh belonged. Laxman Singh and Vazir Singh looked after Kashmir Singh who was lying injured in the tent. During the night nobody came out of the tents but in the morning of 24-2-1977 at about 8. 00 a. m. Mehanga Singh informed people in village Talawara Jheel to which Kashmir Singh belonged. Laxman Singh and Vazir Singh looked after Kashmir Singh who was lying injured in the tent. ( 3 ) AMAR Singh and Inder Singh came along with Mehanga Singh in a jeep and then took Kashmir Singh in the injured condition to Talwara Jheel. Kashmir Singh succumbed to his injuries before reaching the village. His dead body was taken to Talwara Jheel where S. H. O. of Tibi was camping. Laxman Singh went to him. S. H. O. recorded his statement Ex. P/5 and sent it through Dhannaram, F. C. , to Police Station Tibi so that a case may be registered. Consequently, case under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, 324, and 323, IPC was registered. The SHO started investigation. He saw the site, prepared site plan, seized blood-stained soil as well as control soil and sent the dead body of Kashmir Singh to hospital of Tibi, where post-mortem was performed. Accused-appellants were arrested. They gave various informations on the basis of which weapons of offence were recovered. Various items were sent to the FSL wherefrom report Ex. P/28 was received. After investigation, challan was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Hanumangarh who committed the accused-appellants to the Sessions Judge. ( 4 ) LEARNED Sessions Judge tried the accused persons for charges as stated below :- (1) Magar Singh : under Sections 148, 302/307 read with 149, 307, 324, IPC. (2) Kesra and Veer Singh : under Sections 148, 302 and 307 read with 149, IPC. (3) Kashmir Singh and Bhojaram : under Sections 148, 302/307 read with 149, 323, IPC. ( 5 ) PROSECUTION examined as many as 12 witnesses in support of its case. Accused-appellants were examined under Section 313, Cr. P. C. They did not produce any witness in defence. Then the learned Sessions Judge heard arguments and after appreciating evidence convicted Magar Singh and Kesra for offences under Sections 148, 302 read with 149 and 307 read with 149, IPC. He convicted and sentenced Bhojaram, Kashmir Singh and Veer Singh for offences under Sections 147, 302 read with 149, 307 read with 149, IPC. Then the learned Sessions Judge heard arguments and after appreciating evidence convicted Magar Singh and Kesra for offences under Sections 148, 302 read with 149 and 307 read with 149, IPC. He convicted and sentenced Bhojaram, Kashmir Singh and Veer Singh for offences under Sections 147, 302 read with 149, 307 read with 149, IPC. Magar Singh was also convicted for offence under Section 324, IPC and Bhojaram for offences under Sections 323 read with 149, IPC. He also passed various sentences including life imprisonment to all the appellants for offence under Section 302, IPC. It is against this conviction and sentence that these appeals have been preferred. ( 6 ) WE have heard the learned counsel for the accused-appellants as well as learned Public Prosecutor at length. With their help we have gone through the entire evidence on record and have reappreciated it. ( 7 ) THERE can be no doubt that the death of Kashmir Singh was homicidal for the reasons that he suffered as may as seven injuries as per statement of PW 9 Dr. S. M. Saini who performed autopsy on 25-2-1977. According to his opinion the death was due to shock and stoppage of vital functions due to rupture of liver, spleen and right lung lower lobe caused by blunt weapon. He has stated details of the injuries on the various parts of the body of deceased. These injuries were, definitely caused by the appellants as per statements of the three eye-witnesses relied by the prosecution. They are PW 5 Laxman, PW 6 Manga Singh and PW 7 Vazir Singh. They are unanimous on the point that Magar Singh and Kesra had gandasis in their hands while Kashmir Singh and Bhojaram had iron pipes in their hands. All of them have stated that Magar Singh inflicted blow by gandasi on the hand of deceased and Kesra inflicted blow on the parietal region of the deceased. All of them have stated that Kashmir Singh accused-appellant inflicted pipe blow on the nose of the deceased. It has also come in their evidence that Bhojaram also gave beatings. From their evidence it is proved beyond doubt that the accused-appellants were the persons who formed unlawful assembly and inflicted injuries on the person of Kashmir Singh-deceased when he had come to rescue Laxman Singh. Trial Court convicted them for offence under Section 302/149, IPC. It has also come in their evidence that Bhojaram also gave beatings. From their evidence it is proved beyond doubt that the accused-appellants were the persons who formed unlawful assembly and inflicted injuries on the person of Kashmir Singh-deceased when he had come to rescue Laxman Singh. Trial Court convicted them for offence under Section 302/149, IPC. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants never intended to kill Kashmir Singh much so anyone of the complainant party. He submitted that had they any intention to kill Laxman Singh they could have caught and killed him. But since there was no intention to kill anybody their conviction under Section 302, IPC has been wrongly recorded. He has also drawn our attention to the statement of PW 4 Ganda Singh who stated that the distance between two tents was about 40-50 paces and out of the inhabitants of the tents it were Kashmir Singh and Kesar Singh who started bringing liquor and selling it to the labourers. The deceased and Vazir Singh, Laxman Singh and Mehanga Singh objected it. He submitted that it was a trivial matter and there could be no common object of appellants to do away with the life of Kashmir Singh or of any one else. It is proved from evidence that deceased-Kashmir Singh, Mehanga Singh, Vazir Singh and Laxman Singh used to work with Kesraram and live in his tent but later on shifted to another tent. There remained no ill-will to take any revenge. There is definitely no evidence that the appellants decided to take revenge from the deceased or from the persons who are stated to have suffered injuries during the assault. Kashmir Singh-deceased was inside his tent when the incident started. He came later. Laxman ran away and the accused persons chased him to some distance. He was surrounded about 10 paces away from his tent. He started crying and then Kashmir Singh came there. The assailants left Laxman Singh and attacked on Kashmir Singh deceased. It is how the occurrence took place as per unanimous testimony of these three eye-witnesses. It is proved beyond doubt that the appellants inflicted injuries on the person of Kashmir Singh who was aged about 70 years but they had no intention to kill him. They in the circumstances could not have intention to kill him. It is how the occurrence took place as per unanimous testimony of these three eye-witnesses. It is proved beyond doubt that the appellants inflicted injuries on the person of Kashmir Singh who was aged about 70 years but they had no intention to kill him. They in the circumstances could not have intention to kill him. Of course it is well proved that they had formed unlawful assembly and were armed with weapons. ( 8 ) COUNSEL for the appellants contended that the offence did not travel beyond Ss. 323 and 324, IPC. We are unable to agree with him. It is not a case of single blow. As many as seven injuries were inflicted to Kashmir Singh who was a frail and old man. He died due to shock and stoppage of vital functioning due to rupture of liver, spleen and right lung caused by blunt weapon. The deceased was unarmed. The shock was bound to occur because of multiple injuries. It is well proved that the accused-appellants did not intend to cause the death but they had certainly the knowledge that their act could result into the death of Kashmir Singh, therefore, we feel that the conviction under S. 302, IPC should be altered to S. 304, Part II, IPC. ( 9 ) SO far as injuries of Laxman Singh and Manga Singh are concerned, the said three witnesses have deposed individual acts of the individual assailants. Learned Sessions Judge found offence under S. 307/149 proved for causing injuries to Laxman Singh and Manga Singh. But there is no evidence to the effect that the injuries caused to these persons were such which would have caused their death. Laxman Singh has two simple injuries by sharp weapon and they are situated respectively on his right middle finger and right fore-arm. He suffered four other simple injuries caused by blunt object. None of the injuries either caused by sharp or blunt weapon is situated on a vital part of his body. Mehanga Singh suffered four abrasions and they are situated on non-vital parts. There is no evidence that they were sufficient to cause death. So conviction of the accused-appellants for the offence under S. 307, IPC is not correct. It does not travel beyond Ss. 324 and 323, IPC. Mehanga Singh suffered four abrasions and they are situated on non-vital parts. There is no evidence that they were sufficient to cause death. So conviction of the accused-appellants for the offence under S. 307, IPC is not correct. It does not travel beyond Ss. 324 and 323, IPC. ( 10 ) SO far as sentence under S. 304, Part II read with 149, IPC and other offences is concerned, counsel for the appellants submitted that the occurrence took place on 24-2-1977 and more than 20 years have passed and one of the accused persons Veer Singh has expired whose appeal has abated. He submitted that the accused- appellants have settled in their lives. Of course out of them only Kesra was the middle aged person at the time of occurrence while Kashmir Singh, Bhojaram and Magar Singh were young. He submitted that the period already undergone by the accused-appellants should be considered sufficient in the circumstances of the case. Reliance has been placed on 1998 (1) WLC (Raj) 69 : (1998 Cri LJ 918), Purkha Ram v. State of Rajasthan. Learned P. P. has contended that in the said citation the amount of fine was increased and paid as compensation to the next of kin of the deceased. He, therefore, submitted that the amount of fine may be increased which may be paid to the next of kin of the deceased as compensation and to the injured persons. Honble Supreme Court in AIR 1988 SC 2127 : (1989 Cri LJ 116), Hari Kishan v. Sukhbir Singh, observed that all the Courts should exercise the power of awarding compensation to the victim of offence liberally so as to meet the ends of justice in a better way. In Dr. Jacob George v. State of Kerala, (1994) 3 SCC 430 : (1994 Cri LJ 3851), the Apex Court reiterated the observations made in the case of Hari Kishan (supra) and ordered the payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- as fine reducing substantive sentence in a case under S. 314 of IPC. In Dr. Jacob George v. State of Kerala, (1994) 3 SCC 430 : (1994 Cri LJ 3851), the Apex Court reiterated the observations made in the case of Hari Kishan (supra) and ordered the payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- as fine reducing substantive sentence in a case under S. 314 of IPC. In yet another case Baldev Singh v. State of Punjab, (1995) 6 SCC 593 : ( AIR 1996 SC 372 ), when the conviction of the accused-appellants was converted from S. 302/34 to 304 Part I, IPC, their sentence was reduced to the period already undergone (more than 2 years) but they were directed to pay by way of compensation a sum of Rs. 35,000/- each to the widow of victim and her children. ( 11 ) KEEPING all the facts and circumstances of this case in view, we feel that when more than 20 years have elapsed since the occurrence took place and the accused-appellants have settled down in their lives and one of them Kesra is about 65 years of age, a lenient view should be taken in the matter. In our opinion the period of sentence already undergone (about 11/2 years) and a fine of Rs. 12,000/- each will be adequate sentence in this case for offence under S. 304, Part II/149, IPC. ( 12 ) CONSEQUENTLY, the appeals are partly allowed. Conviction of accused-appellants (1) Magar Singh, (2) Kashmir Singh, (3) Bhojaram, and (4) Kesra is altered from 302/149 to 304, Part II read with 149, IPC. Their conviction for forming unlawful assembly under S. 148, IPC is maintained but conviction from 307/149, IPC is altered to 323, 324 read with 149, IPC for causing injuries to Laxman Singh and Mehanga Singh. Their substantive sentence of imprisonment under all the counts is reduced to the period already undergone. But they are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 12,000/- each. In default of payment of fine each of them shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. Out of the amount of fine of Rs. 48,000/-, if realised, Rs. 40,000/- shall be given to the next of kin of Kashmir Singh- deceased as compensation and Rs. 4,000/- each to other two injured persons i. e. Laxman Singh and Mehanga Singh. In default of payment of fine each of them shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. Out of the amount of fine of Rs. 48,000/-, if realised, Rs. 40,000/- shall be given to the next of kin of Kashmir Singh- deceased as compensation and Rs. 4,000/- each to other two injured persons i. e. Laxman Singh and Mehanga Singh. The accused-appellants are given one months time to deposit the amount of fine failing which the learned Sessions Judge shall take steps to arrest the accused person/persons and to send him/them to prison. Appeal partly allowed.