( 1 ) THIS appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of sentence dated 14the july, 1999 passed by learned Addi. Sessions judge against the appellant herein whereby the appellant is held guilty of offence committed under Section 307 of the Indian penal Code and the sentence to undergo imprisonment of three years and fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. Fine has since been paid. ( 2 ) THIS appeal was admitted on 17the february, 2000 and vide Order dated 20the april, 2000 the sentence of the appellant was suspended pending disposal of the appeal on his furnishing bail Rs. 10,000/- in personal bond with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. ( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant does not challenge the finding of the Trial Court holding the appellant guilty of having committed offence under Section 307 of the ipc. His only submission is that keeping in view the age of the appellant at the time of commission of offence as well as other attendent circumstances be reduced. It has been established on record that age of the appellant was 17 to 18 years at the time of commission of offence. At the time when offence was committed Trial took place and the judgment was delivered, Juvenile Justice act 1986 was in operation as per which a person could be juvenile if he was less than 16years of age. However, the parliament came into force w. e. f. SO the December, 2000. As per the definition of "juvenile" or "child" contained in Section 2 (a) of the said Act, a person would be "juvenile" or "child" if he/ she has not completed 18 years of age. No doubt this Act is not applicable in the instant case but what is highlighted is that as per the law prevailing today even a person who is less than 18 years of age would be Juvenile. This fact is taken note of only from the point of view of considering the sentence which should be meted out the appellant. At this stage, it would be useful to refer to Order on the point of sentence passed by the learned Additional sessions Judge. This order reads as under;- " I have heard the accused and learned addl. This fact is taken note of only from the point of view of considering the sentence which should be meted out the appellant. At this stage, it would be useful to refer to Order on the point of sentence passed by the learned Additional sessions Judge. This order reads as under;- " I have heard the accused and learned addl. P. P. for the State on the point of sentence. The case against the accused is u/s307 IPC. He gave injury on the stomach. There was only one injury. The occasion was not very serious. The accused though not juvenile is bordering on the age of which he will be treated as juvenile. He was one or two yeas older than juvenile at the time of incident. having regard to these facts and circumstances, it would serve the interest of justice if the accused is sentenced to undergo R1 for three years and a fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to suffer SI for one month. Announced in open Court". ( 4 ) LEARNED ASJ noted that although appellant was not a juvenile but he was bordering on the age of which he would be treated as juvenile. Taking this fact into consideration and other peculiar circumstances in which the incident took place and also that only one injury was caused and the occasion was not very serious, it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence awarded to the appellant. ( 5 ) AT the time when the sentence was suspended vide Order dated 20the April,2000, appellant had undergo about eight months of sentence. keeping in view the circumstances narrated above including that he was only 17 to 18 years of age; he belongs to poor strata of the society; there is no other incident reported against him and also his present age (around 23 years of age as on today) it is a fit case where the sentenced awarded to the appellant be reduced to one already undergo. ( 6 ) THE appeal is accordingly disposed of in aforesaid terms. ( 7 ) THE bail bond furnished by the appellant] shall stand discharged.