JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22.5.1981 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bikaner convicting the accused appellant of offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to two and a half years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment to further undergo two months' rigorous imprisonment. The appellant has also been convicted for offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 50/-, in default of payment' to further/Undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case as disclosed during the trial is that the accused appellant Nemi Chand, the complainant Dev Kishan PW 2, and the prosecution witnesses PW 4 Buiaki Das and PW 5 Shyam Sunder are residents of the same Mohalia in the city of Bikaner. On 6.2.1979 at about 8.30 or 9.00 RM., it is alleged that Dev Kishan, Shyam Sunder and Buiaki Das, after leaving Dev Kishan's sister and her husband at the Railway Station were proceeding towards Ramdev Ji Ka Mela at Sujandesar. In the way the accused appellant Nemi Chand came running and all of a sudden attacked Shyam Sunder by knife. He gave another blow on the face of Shyam Sunder. It is also alleged that he stabbed in the stomac of Dev Kishan. Both the injured could be saved on the intervention of Buiaki Ram. Both the injured were rushed to the hospital. PW 3 Dr. Bai Kishan examined Dev Kishan and noticed the following injuries : "1. Stab Wound 2.0 cms.x0.6 crns.xgoing deep about the muscle layer and lower down on the left costal margin on the lateral side ok chest wall. Fresh bleeding from the wound present. Wound is ellaptical in shape. 2. Stab injury of 1.5 cms. x0.6 cms. about 2.0 cms. deep on the left renal angle. Bleeding on handling the wound." 3. He has proved the injury report Ex.R 5. 4. He also examined Shyam Sunder and noticed the following injuries : "1. Incised wound-4.0 cms. x 1.5 cms.x muscle deep on the angle of mouth right side extending towards mandible lower down-Bleeding present. 2. Incised wound-1.0 cm.x0.5 cm.xmuscle deep on the left side of upper lip near the angle of mouth. He has proved the injury report Ex.R 5. 4. He also examined Shyam Sunder and noticed the following injuries : "1. Incised wound-4.0 cms. x 1.5 cms.x muscle deep on the angle of mouth right side extending towards mandible lower down-Bleeding present. 2. Incised wound-1.0 cm.x0.5 cm.xmuscle deep on the left side of upper lip near the angle of mouth. Fresh bleeding present on examination." 5. He proved the injury report Ex.P 10. 6. The learned Sessions Judge relying on the testimony of the eye witnesses namely, PW 2 Dev Kishan, PW 4 Buiaki Das and PW 5 Shyam Sunder corroborated by the medical evidence convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated above. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is well established by the evidence of the aforesaid three eye witnesses that the appellant inflicted the injuries to PW 2 Dev Kishan and PW 5 Shyam Sunder. The injury no. 1 on the person of Dev Kishan has been found to be grievous caused by sharp edged weapon. It is contended by Mr. J.R. Choudhary, learned counsel for appellant, that the basis of opinion of the Dr. Bai Kishan with respect to the injury no. 1 is the operation note but the same has not been produced. In view of this, the injury no. 1 cannot be said to be dangerous to life. I have read Ex.R 9 wherein the PW 3 Dr. Bal Kishan has opined as follows: "Injury no. 1 was going upto spleen and there was tear of about 1.5 cm. size in the spleen. Blood clots were present in the peritoneal cavity." 8. In view of the nature of the operation and type of the injury-the injury no. 1 is dangerous to life. 9. It clearly appears that Dr. Bal Kishan has not opined the injury to be dangerous to life only on the basis of the operation note but also on the basis of the type of injury noticed by him. Thus, in my view there is no substance in the contention raised by the appellant. 10. The simple injuries caused by sharp edged weapon to PW 5 Shyam Sunder is also proved by the aforesaid eye witnesses and the medical evidence. Thus, the conviction of the appellant under Secs. 326 and 324 IPC does not call for interference and accordingly the same is confirmed. 10. The simple injuries caused by sharp edged weapon to PW 5 Shyam Sunder is also proved by the aforesaid eye witnesses and the medical evidence. Thus, the conviction of the appellant under Secs. 326 and 324 IPC does not call for interference and accordingly the same is confirmed. On the point of sentence, it is submitted that the learned counsel for the appellant that the accused appellant was a young boy of 17 to 18 years of age at the time of incident. There was no enmity between the parties. The incident took place on the spur of moment, it is thus submitted that the sentence be reduced to the period already undergone. Considering ali the facts and circumstances of the case, the ends of justibe would met if the sentences is reduced for the priod already undergone. 11. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed confirming the conviction of the appellant under Secs. 326 and 324 IPC with the modification on the point of sentence. The sentence is reduced to the period already undergone. The appellant shall deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000/- before the Trial Court as compensation. Four months time is granted to deposit this amount. If the amount is deposited within the stipulated period, the Trial Court shall pay a sum of Rs; 3,000/- to PW 2 Dev Kishan and a sum of Rs. 2,000/- to PW 4 Shyam Sunder. In case, the said amount is not deposited before the Trial Court within the stipulated time, the order of reducing the sentence shall stand vacated and the appellant would undergo the remaining part of the sentence awarded by the Trial Court. 12. Thus, the appeal with the modification' on the point of sentence and direction of compensation, stands dismissed. *******