Judgment S.N.Pathak, J. 1. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 6-9-2000 passed by 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Criminal Appeal No. 94/94. Revisionist was convicted by the trial Court for the offence under Secs. 147,148, 323 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo SI for 2 years for the offence under sec. 326, Indian Penal Code, 1860 , 1 year SI for the offence under Secs. 147 and 148, Indian Penal Code, 1860 and 6 months SI for the offence u/s. 323, Indian Penal Code, 1860 . However, the appellate Court acquitted the revisionist under Secs. 147 and 323, Indian Penal Code, 1860 a id upheld the sentence passed against the revisionist under Secs. 148 and 326, Indian Penal Code, 1860 . 2. It has been submitted by the revisionists lawyer that the injury sustained by the petitioner is only on the ankle. So perhaps, there was chance of sustaining his injury somewhere else or in some other manner. However, his contention cannot be taken on its face value as both the Courts below have given a current finding that the injuries were caused by the petitioner while he dealt garasa blow on the informant. It has further been submitted that the revisionist was assessed to be of 63 years of age on the date of the judgment of the trial Court dated 25-8-1994 and now he has advanced in his age and he is a retired Government employee. 3. In the result, this revision is dismissed so far as order of conviction is concerned. So far as sentence is concerned, in view of his old age, imprisonment of fine shall meet the ends of justice. So, the revisionist is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000.00 and in default so undergo SI for one month. The fine, if realised, shall be paid to the informant, within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this judgment in the lower Court. 4. With the above modification in the sentence, this revision is dismissed.