JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been filed by the accused-appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.6.2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aklera District Jhalawar by which he has convicted the accused-appellant for the offence u/ss. 307, 323, 324 & 504 IPC and sentenced as follows : U/s. 307 IPC to undergo five years' R.I. and fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default one month's R.I. U/s. 324 IPC to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default one month's R.I. U/s. 323 IPC to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. In default one month's R.I. U/s. 504 IPC to undergo three months R.I. All the above substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. It arises in the following circumstances that on 3.2.1999 at about 8.00 p.m. PW-1 Ghanshyam lodged the report Ex.P/1 which the Police Station Manohar Thana, District Jhalawar stating therein that at about 7.30 p.m. when he was taking tuition for the children at his home, the accused-appellant was making abuses for which he intervened and thereupon the accused-appellant caused a knife blow on the head and another blow was given by him on his abdomen as a result of which blood came out. On this report, the police registered a case and started investigation. During investigation, PW-1 Ghanshyam was got medically examined by PW-8 Dr. Mohd. Akbar. The injury report is Ex.P/7 and the X-ray report is Ex.P/8 and as per the X-ray report, PW-8 Dr. Mohd. Akbar opined that injuries Nos. 3 & 4 were dangerous to life. Through Ex.P/9, arrest memo, the accused-appellant was got arrested on 4.2.1999. After investigation, challan was filed and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. On 21.10.1999, charges for the offence u/ss. 307, 324, 323 & 504 IPC were read over and explained to accused-appellant who pleaded not guilty, and claimed to be tried. During trial nine witnesses were examined by the prosecution. Statement u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. of the accused-appellant was recorded. After conclusion of the trial, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as stated above. 3. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the present appeal has been filed by the accused-appellant before this Court. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5. Statement u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. of the accused-appellant was recorded. After conclusion of the trial, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as stated above. 3. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the present appeal has been filed by the accused-appellant before this Court. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5. In this appeal, only two submissions have been raised by the learned counsel for the appellant. The first contention is that from the evidence on record, no case for offence u/s. 307 IPC was made out against the accused-appellant and thus, the findings of conviction for offence u/s. 307 IPC are erroneous and at the most a case for offence u/s. 326 IPC can be said to be made out. The second contention is that in case that this Court comes to the conclusion that the accused-appellant has committed the offence u/s. 326 IPC, he should be released for the period already undergone by him as he has been in jail for more than two years. 6. On the contrary, the learned Public Prosecutor has supported the judgment. 7. In his statement, the injured Ghanshyam PW-1 has stated that the accused gave a knife blow on his head but this part is not supported by the medical evidence. As per the injury report Ex.P/7 the injured sustained two injuries by sharp-edged weapon. These two injuries are on the abdomen and as per the statement of PW-1 Ghanshyam, the accused caused one knife injury on his abdomen. Thus, it can be concluded that the accused-appellant has inflicted one knife blow on the person of the injured Ghanshyam PW-1 and that blow caused injuries Nos. 3 & 4 of Ex.P/7. On the basis of the X-ray report Ex.P/8, PW-8 Dr. Mohd. Akbar has further opined that on the basis of clinical and, operative notes, injuries Nos. 3 & 4 were dangerous to life. 8. In this case, neither the operation notes have been produced nor the doctor who conducted the operation has been examined. PW-8 Dr. Mohd. Akbar nowhere has stated that the injuries were stated to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 9. 3 & 4 were dangerous to life. 8. In this case, neither the operation notes have been produced nor the doctor who conducted the operation has been examined. PW-8 Dr. Mohd. Akbar nowhere has stated that the injuries were stated to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 9. To sustain the charge u/s. 307 IPC, the bodily injury intended to be inflicted should have been sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death and further more to attract the penalty u/s. 307 IPC there should be murderous intend. 10. In the present case, only one blow was given by the accused-appellant on the abdomen of injured Ghanshyam PW-1 and thereafter, that was not repeated by him. The injuries sustained by the injured were not sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death and thus, it cannot be inferred that the accused-appellant had intention to commit murder of injured Ghanshyam, PW-1. In these circumstances, by causing a sharp-edged weapon injury on the person of the injured the accused-appellant has committed offence punishable u/s. 326 IPC in place of Section 307 IPC and thus, findings of conviction of the accused-appellant for offence u/s. 307 IPC by the trial Court are not to be sustained and they are to be altered as stated above. 11. Since, in the present case, the accused-appellant has been in jail for more than two years and for offence u/s. 326 IPC that period would be sufficient to meet the ends of justice. Thus, for the reasons mentioned above, this appeal is partly allowed. Conviction of the accused-appellant is altered to Section 326 IPC from Section 307 IPC and is accordingly convicted for offence u/s. 326 IPC and for that offence he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. The judgment and order passed by the learned trial Court stands modified accordingly to the above extent and rest of the judgment of conviction and sentence for other offences is, maintained. 12. Since the accused-appellant is in jail he be released forthwith if not required in any other case.Appeal partly allowed. *******