ORDER The petitioner is an accused in Sessions Case No.114 of 1992. He was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge for an offence punishable under Sec.307, I.P.C. on the allegation that at about 7.30 p.m. on 26.4.1991 the petitioner cut P.W.1 with a knife and severed the index finger on his right hand. The occurrence was witnessed by P.W.2, the wife of P.W.1, the victim and P.W.4 a person who was taking tea in the tea stall and P.W.5, the owner of the tea stall where the occurrence took place. After the incident, P.W.1 was taken to the Government Hospital, Tirunelveli and produced before P.W.3, the duty doctor at 8.45 p.m. The doctor examined the victim and found two grievous injuries. Ex.P-3 is the accident register issued by the doctor in respect of the injuries noted by him. On receipt of the information that the victim is admitted in the hospital, P.W.6, the Head Constable reached the hospital at 9.00 p.m. and recorded the statement, Ex.P-1 given by P.W.1 which was attested by P.W.2. A case in Crime No.421 of 1991 under Sec.307, I.P.C. was registered and Ex.P-5 is a copy of the printed first information report. The Inspector, P.w.9, took up investigation, who after taking up investigation, drew the rough sketch and also prepared the observation mahazar. He questioned the witnesses and recorded their statements. After completing investigation, the final report was filed against the accused. 2. When questioned under Sec.313, Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. P.C.), the accused denied the incriminating circumstances. The trial Court accepted the prosecution version and convicted and sentenced him to suffer 4 years rigorous imprisonment and also directed him to pay a fine of Rs.1,000 with a default sentence of 3 months simple imprisonment. The appeal preferred by him was dismissed. Hence, the present revision. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the evidence of P.W.1 is not very satisfactory and that the evidence is very flimsy. He submits that at any rate no offence under Sec.307 is made out. I have heard the learned Government Advocate on the contentions and also perused the materials. 4. The Courts below have accepted the evidence of P.W.1 the victim in this case. He submits that at any rate no offence under Sec.307 is made out. I have heard the learned Government Advocate on the contentions and also perused the materials. 4. The Courts below have accepted the evidence of P.W.1 the victim in this case. He suffered injuries, according to him, at the hands of the petitioner at about 7.30 p.m. on 26.4.1991 while he was taking tea in a tea stall of P.W.5; This evidence is supported by P.W.2 his wife and P.W.3 the owner of the tea stall. Their evidence is also supported by P.W.4, an independent person, who was present at the tea stall and taking tea at the relevant point of time, P.W.5 is a natural witness since he is the owner of the tea stall and there is no reason for me to reject his evidence, which supports P.W.1's evidence that P.W.1 was cut by the petitioner. Immediately after the incident, P.W.1 was taken to the hospital and produced before P.W.3, who admitted him and treated him. The evidence of the Doctor also supports the prosecution version that P.W.1 suffered injuries. P.W.1, being the victim and in the absence of any serious motive for him to come out with a false allegation against the petitioner, this Court finds it difficult to reject the evidence of the prosecution. The Courts below were right in accepting the evidence and this Court in the revision is not going to set aside those findings. 5. The other contention that no offence under Sec.307, I.P.C., is made out is to be stated only to be rejected. P.W.1, in his evidence has stated that the accused attempted to cut his neck by aiming his aruval and inflicted the cut. According to him, he warded off the cut and suffered injuries in his hands. This fact is found mentioned in the complaint, Ex.P-1 filed by him. While attempting to cut the victim on the neck, the petitioner also uttered words that he must be done to death. The words uttered by him and the part of the body to which the cut was aimed clearly indicate that the petitioner attempted to murder P.W.1 and fortunately, P.W.1 escaped when he put up his hands to ward off the cut and suffered grievous injuries. Therefore, the contention that no offence under Sec.307, I.P.C. is made out is also rejected. 6. Therefore, the contention that no offence under Sec.307, I.P.C. is made out is also rejected. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be dealt with leniently in the matter of sentence since according to him, the victim P.W.1 is no more and if some substantial fine amount is imposed, it will be useful to the family of P.W.1, who was murdered by some persons after the incident. I had given anxious consideration and also heard the learned Government Advocate on the above plea. The occurrence took place in the year 1991. P.W.1, the victim is no more and his wife is living alone with her children and under the circumstances, I feel that if some financial support is given to the family of the victim. P.W.1, it will be more useful, which at the same time, must also be a punishment to the petitioner. Therefore, while reducing the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner to the period already undergone, I direct him to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000 which will be in addition to Rs.1,000 imposed upon him by the Courts below. In default of fine of Rs.1,00,000 he will suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of 4 years. It is reported that the petitioner had already paid the fine amount of Rs.1,000. If the petitioner pays the fine amount of Rs.1,00,000 imposed upon him by this Court, the said amount of Rs.1,00,000 will be paid as compensation to the wife of P.W.1, Sankari, who was examined as P.W.2 in the trial Court and the fine amount will be deposited in Court by the petitioner within eight weeks from to-day. With the above modification in the sentence, the revision is dismissed. B.S.-----Revision dismissed with modification in sentence.