JUDGMENT 1. -This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26.9.1980 passed by the learned Session Judge, Jalore convicting the accused-appellant of offence under section 307 IPC and sentencing him to 3 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/-, in default of payment, to further undergo 3 months R.I. The appellant has also been convicted of offence under sections 326, 324 IPC. 2. The prosecution case is that one Manroop Chand PW 10 lodged a FIR at Police Station, Bhinmal on 5.5.1980 at about 7.45 p.m. alleging that about 5.30 p.m. he came to know that the accused-Shambhu Singh has inflicted knife injuries on the person of his brother Paras Mal near 'Maha Laxmi Temple'. He reached on the spot where Suresh Vyas PW 12 told him that Shambhu Singh had inflicted injuries and snatched away a Watch, Golden chain and currency notes of Rs. 800/- from Parasmal. On this information, Police registered a case of offence under sections 394, 307 & 323 IPC. After usual investigation, the Police laid the challan against the appellant for the aforesaid offence. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The trial Court relying on the testimony of the injured PW 5 Parasmal and two other eye-witnesses PW 11 Om Prakash and PW 12 Suresh Vyas, corroborated by the medical evidence of PW 1 Dr. Tej Singh, convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated above. 3. Assailing .the conviction of the appellant, it is contended by Mr. Vijay Bishnoi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, that it is a categorical statement of doctor that the injury on the person of the injured Parasmal attributed to the appellant was not sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. He thus submits that the conviction of the appellant under section 307 IPC per se is illegal. 4. I have considered the contentions of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and perused the record. The testimony of the injured witness PW 5 is unattainable. He stated that the accused-Shambhu Singh attacked him with knife, causing injury on the left side of the back. This statement is supported by PW 11 Om Prakash and PW 12 Suresh Vyas. PW 1 Dr. Tej Singh has stated that he examined injured Parasmal on 5.5.1980 and prepared injury report Ex. P/1. He noticed following injuries : 1. He stated that the accused-Shambhu Singh attacked him with knife, causing injury on the left side of the back. This statement is supported by PW 11 Om Prakash and PW 12 Suresh Vyas. PW 1 Dr. Tej Singh has stated that he examined injured Parasmal on 5.5.1980 and prepared injury report Ex. P/1. He noticed following injuries : 1. Stab wound (elliptical shape with clean cut marzines) of 2 cm. x 1 cm. x 3 cm. (Deep) on the Rt. side of back (7th Intercostal spruce near Costal arch.) with profuse continuous bleeding. The direction of wound being obliquely downward and forward. When the patient is turned to the side of the injury gasp, blood comes out in quite large amount. 2. Stab wound 3 cm. x 1 cm. x 4 cm. vertically with middle part of left glutaeal region. Erection of this injury forward vertically. According to him injury No. 1 was grievous in nature whereas injury No. 2 was simple. Both the injuries were caused by a sharp edged weapon. 5. For offence under section 307 IPC it is not necessary that injury should be sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. However, as the injury has been on the back of the injured, it appears that the accused had no intention to commit murder. In view of this, the conviction of the appellant under section 307 IPC cannot be sustained. The injury No. 1 is grievous in nature and caused by sharp edged weapon and, therefore, he is liable to be convicted of offence under section 326 IPC. 6. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is partly allowed and the conviction of the appellant of offence under section 307 IPC is set aside. The conviction of the appellant of offence under section 326 IPC is upheld. The accused has been sentenced to 2 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- for the said offences. He has also been convicted of offence under section 324 IPC. It is stated that the accused has remained in Jail during the period 8.5,1980 to 9.10.1980. He has thus, undergone the sentence more than 5 months. The incident is of the year 1980. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the ends of justice would meet if the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone. It is stated that the accused has remained in Jail during the period 8.5,1980 to 9.10.1980. He has thus, undergone the sentence more than 5 months. The incident is of the year 1980. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the ends of justice would meet if the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone. Accordingly, the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone. The appellant however, will deposit the sum of Rs. 5,000/- before the trial Court as compensation, payable to the injured PW 5 Parasmal. Four months' time is granted for depositing the amount of compensation. In case the amount is not deposited within the stipulated time, the order reducing the sentence of period already undergone shall stand vacated and the appeal shall stand dismissed as a consequence, the appellant will face remaining part of his sentence of 2 years. In such event, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalore will ensure the arrest of the appellant to undergo the remaining sentence.Appeal partly allowed. *******