JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nohar, District Hanumangarh whereby he convicted accused-appellant Shrawangir for the offence under Sections 307 and 324 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, further imprisonment of three months for the offence under Section 307 and punished with one year's rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 324 I.P.C. However, the accused-appellant was acquitted under Section 323 I.P.C. 2. Charge against the accused-appellant was that on 24.1.2002 at about 5.00 P.M., accused inflicted axe blow on the head of Bhagat Ram in order to commit culpable homicide amounting to murder at Chak 1 RWM, Rawatsar near the Shop of Nimbaram. He also inflicted two other axe blows which were both simple and grievous in nature. The report of the incident was lodged on the statement of Bharat Ram. The axe was recovered. The injured was medically examined. After investigation, police filed challan against the accused-appellant under Sections 307, 326, 324 and 323 I.P.C. before Judicial Magistrate, Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh who committed the case to the sessions. Learned trial Judge framed charges against the accused-appellant under the above-sections to which he pleaded no guilty. Prosecution examined seven witnesses. Statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. He led no evidence in defence. 3. After hearing the arguments, learned trial Judge came to the conclusion about the gilt of the accused under Section 307 which was punishable higher than the offence under Section 326 I.P.C. and under Section 324 I.P.C. and sentenced him as above. However, accused-appellant was acquitted under Section 323 I.P.C. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn my attention towards the statement of injured Bhagat Ram, PW-2 who was about 21 years of age at the time of incident and stated that incident took place at the time of playing Ball near the shop of Nimba Ram. Accused-appellant asked them not to play and put chopping woods and inflicted axe blow. Same is the statement of Pappu Singh PW-3, Nimba Ram PW-4 and Bajrang Lal PW-5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that all the four witnesses including injured nowhere stated that there was any motive preparation or conduct of the accused to kill injured Bhagat Ram. 5. Same is the statement of Pappu Singh PW-3, Nimba Ram PW-4 and Bajrang Lal PW-5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that all the four witnesses including injured nowhere stated that there was any motive preparation or conduct of the accused to kill injured Bhagat Ram. 5. To bring home the offence under Section 307 I.P.C., it must be shown that whoever does any act with such intention of knowledge, and under such circumstances, that if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder. Merely because, head injury has been caused with axe and the opinion of the doctor that it was dangerous to life cannot bring his case under Section 307 I.P.C. At the most, it can be a case of voluntarily causing grievous injury with sharp weapon punishable under Section 326 I.P.C. 6. Having perused the statements of the injured and the witnesses, the contention of the learned counsel appears to be reasonable and his further contention that leniency should be adopted on the issue of sentence is also just and proper. In this case, accused is already in custody since 3.11.2004 i.e. for about 31/4 years and previously also he remained in custody for four months during trial, the ends of justice will meet if his sentence is reduced to the period already undergone. 7. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the accused-appellant Shrawangir under Section 307 I.P.C. is altered to Section 326 I.P.C. by maintaining his conviction under Section 324 I.P.C. So far as sentence part is concerned, accused remained in custody for about 3 years and 10 months. He is sentenced for the period already undergone. However, sentence of fine of Rs. 500/- shall remain intact. The accused appellant is in jail, he shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case on deposit of fine.Appeal partly allowed. *******