Judgment Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.-Informant Mohd. Salim (PW. 7) in the written report attributed injuries of Akram (deceased) to 4-5 persons. On that report a case under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 IPC was registered on 22.02.1996 at Police Station Sodala Jaipur and investigation commenced. Charge sheet was however filed under Sections 302/34 IPC against Rais @ Bhure Khan, Don @ Murari and Jayesh Sharma (appellant herein). Jayesh Sharma, who was released on interim bail, absconded and was declared absconder on 19.01.1998 and standing warrants were issued against him. Trial against Rais and Don however proceeded and learned trial Judge vide Judgment dated 010.1999 acquitted them. 2. On 24.08.2001 Jayesh Sharma was arrested and trial against him proceeded. Charge under Section 302 IPC was framed against him. He denied the charge and claimed trial. As many as 17 witnesses were examined by the prosecution, Jayesh claimed innocence in his explanation under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code. Learned trial Judge vide Judgment dated 21.01.2003 convicted and sentence Jayesh under Section 302 IPC to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/-and in default to further suffer three months imprisonment .3. Death of Mohd. Akram was undeniably homicidal in nature. A look at Post Mortem Report (Exhibit P. 11) reveals that following ante mortem injuries were found on the dead body : 1. StabIncised wound 3 x 1.8 cm x abdominal cavity deep with clotted blood, placed obliquely on Lt. side front of abdomen lower 1/3rd. It is 7.5 cm below & lateral to umbilicus margins of the wounds are clean cut, regular & well defused and through this wound loop of ileum found protruded out. 2. Stab incised wound 3.5 x 1.8 cm x abdominal cavity deep clotted blood present obliquely on front of abdomen lower 1/3rd portion, just right side to the mid line. It is 6 cm below umbilicus and 9 cm away from Injury No. 1. Margins of the wounds are clean cut regular & well defused and through this wound loop of ileum found protruded out through this wound. 3. Threeabrasions in an area of 6 x 5 cm of size 3 x 0.5 cm, 2.8 x 0.5 cm & 2 x 0.5 cm present on Lt. side pack of chest lower 1/3rd. 4. Margins of the wounds are clean cut regular & well defused and through this wound loop of ileum found protruded out through this wound. 3. Threeabrasions in an area of 6 x 5 cm of size 3 x 0.5 cm, 2.8 x 0.5 cm & 2 x 0.5 cm present on Lt. side pack of chest lower 1/3rd. 4. Multiple abrasionsvarying in size from 2.5 x 5 cm to 0.8 x .5 cm present on back of abdomen at lumber region on both sides in area of 15 x 11 cm. In the opinion of Dr. Hans Raj Meena (PW. 1) the cause of death was syncop as a result of injuries to mesentery, aorta, mesocalan & Illeum with excessive hemorrhage as a result of external Injuries Nos. 1 & 2. 4. Informant Mohd. Salim (PW. 7) and Iqbal (PW. 8), who are star witnesses of the prosecution, made improvements in their statements at the trial and attributed fatal injuries of the deceased to appellant Jayesh. We find these witnesses have not come out with whole truth and the manner of occurrence is not correctly stated by them. The first version in the written report however was that 4-5 persons caused injuries on the person of Akram with some injuries thing. The fatal injuries received by the deceased were attributed to four persons. 5. Having analysed the evidence adduced at the trial we find that although participation of appellant in the guilt is established, it could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt that he inflicted the fatal injuries. 6. In order to adjudge to who was responsible for the fatal injuries sustained by deceased Akram, when we considered the evidence of witnesses we find that the injuries received by the deceased have been attributed to four persons. In a similar situation, the Apex Court in Amrik Singh vs. State of Punjab, 1994 Supp (1) SCC 320, indicated that where the injury which proved to be fatal was not attributed to any one of the accused, conviction under Section 302 IPC was not sustainable and the accused could be held guilty under Section 326 IPC. 7. In the ultimate analysis we find that the injuries caused to the deceased were attributed to four persons. 7. In the ultimate analysis we find that the injuries caused to the deceased were attributed to four persons. Since the injuries that proved to be fatal are attributed to appellant, we in view of the ratio indicated in Amrik Singh vs. State of Punjab, 1994 Supp (1) SCC 320, hold the appellant guilty under Section 326 read with 34 IPC. 8. For these reasons, we partly allow the appeal and instead of Section 302, we convict the appellant under Section 327 read with 34 IPC. Looking to the fact that the appellant has already confinement for a period of more than six years and two months, ends of justice would be met in sentencing him to the period already undergone by him in confinement. The appellant, who is in jail, shall be set at liberty forthwith, if he is not required to be detained in any other case. The impugned Judgment of learned trial Court stands modified as indicated above.