Judgment ( 1. ) APPELLANT has preferred this appeal challenging his conviction and order of sentence passed by Second Additional sessions Judge, Sidhi in S. T. No. 157/99, decided on 22. 09. 2000. ( 2. ) APPELLANT has been convicted under Section 326 of ipc and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default further rigorous imprisonment for one month, by the impugned judgment. ( 3. ) ACCORDING to prosecution, on 07. 09. 99 at about 7:00 A. M. , when victim Lalji Tiwari was grazing his cattle on the govt. land on the hillock of village Baldeh, appellant objected to it, which led to an altercation between Lalji Tiwari and the appellant. Appellant Sanat Kumar then gave an axe blow aiming at the neck of the complainant, which landed on his left leg cutting his tibia and fibula bones and the blood vessels. Injured Lalji Tiwari was rushed to nearby Govt. Hospital semariya, from where he was referred to District Hospital Sidhi and thereafter to Shanti Nursing Home, Rewa. As a result of severe injury, his left leg was amputated. ( 4. ) THE FIR of the incident was lodged by Mohanlal tiwari, the brother of the injured, at Police Post Semariya, on the basis of which an offence was registered at Police Station churhat against the appellant and was investigated. The axe used in the commission of offence was seized from the appellant. After due investigation, appellant was prosecuted under Section 307 of IPC and was put to trial. ( 5. ) APPELLANT abjured the guilt and pleaded false implication. According to the appellant, Lalji Tiwari was grazing his cattle on his land damaging his crop and when the appellant objected to it, Lalji grappled with him and in the scuffle he sustained injuries by tangi. ( 6. ) LEARNED Additional Sessions Judge, after trial and upon appreciation of the evidence adduced in the case, acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 307 of IPC, but found him guilty for committing the offence under Section 326 of IPC, sentenced him as aforesaid by the impugned judgment, which has been challenged in this appeal. ( 7. ( 6. ) LEARNED Additional Sessions Judge, after trial and upon appreciation of the evidence adduced in the case, acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 307 of IPC, but found him guilty for committing the offence under Section 326 of IPC, sentenced him as aforesaid by the impugned judgment, which has been challenged in this appeal. ( 7. ) APPEAL is preferred inter alia on the ground that learned trial court erroneously convicted the appellant on the basis of unreliable testimony of complainant Lalji Tiwari without any independent corroboration and failed to consider that complainant himself was the aggressor and he had no right to graze his cattle in appellants field; impugned sentence is also said to be too severe and uncalled for in the facts and circumstances of the case. ( 8. ) LEARNED counsel for the State, on the other hand, justified and supported the conviction of the appellant. ( 9. ) PERUSED the evidence on record. Victim Lalji Tiwari (P. W-1) deposed in his evidence that on 07. 09. 99 at about 6:30 in the morning, he was grazing his cattle on the Govt. land situated on the hillock of village Baldeh, appellant came there, and resisted him; appellant then gave him an axe blow, which landed on his left knee. Upon hue and cry, Ashok, Mohan, shyam Sunder and Girija Prasad came there and took him to semariya Hospital, from where he was sent to Sidhi Hospital and then to Rewa Hospital. According to P. W-1 Lalji Tiwari, he remained hospitalized in Shanti Nursing Home, Rewa for 57 days. The FIR of the incident (Ex. P-13) was, however, lodged by P. W-5 Mohanlal Tiwari on the same day, which was recorded by A. S. I. B. N. Yogi (P. W-8 ). ( 10. ) P. W-6 Girija Prasad Tiwari also tried to corroborate the version of injured Lalji Tiwari, but presence of this witness on the scene of occurrence has been held to be doubtful by the trial court. Be that as it may, there are no reasons to disbelieve the statement of injured Lalji Tiwari (P. W-1) himself that appellant had assaulted him by axe causing injury on his left knee, which also stood corroborated by the medical evidence. ( 11. ) IT is clearly borne out from the medical evidence of dr. Be that as it may, there are no reasons to disbelieve the statement of injured Lalji Tiwari (P. W-1) himself that appellant had assaulted him by axe causing injury on his left knee, which also stood corroborated by the medical evidence. ( 11. ) IT is clearly borne out from the medical evidence of dr. Babita Khare (P. W-2), who had examined Lalji Tiwari on 07. 09. 99 at District Hospital Sidhi, that there was an incised wound of 5" x 2" x 2" size below his left knee and his both bones, muscles and vessels were found cut and bleeding profusely. In the opinion of Dr. Babita Khare (P. W-2), the injury found on his left knee was caused by sharp cutting object within six hours of his examination. It is further evident from the testimony of Dr. Babita Khare (P. W-2) that upon X-ray examination of injured Lalji Tiwari his tibia and fibula bones of left leg were found fractured vide X-ray report Ex. P-7. It also transpires from the evidence of Dr. Amit Kumar Tirpathi (P. W-3)that due to infection in the injury and gangrene, his left leg below knee had to be amputated. There are no reasons to discard the aforesaid medical evidence. ( 12. ) ALTHOUGH injured Lalji Tiwari (P. W-1) was cross-examined in extenso, but nothing has been elicited so as to disbelieve his version that appellant had assaulted him by an axe causing grievous injury in his left leg. P. W-1 Lalji Tiwari has denied the suggestion made in his cross-examination that he was grazing his cattle on the land allotted to the appellant and on protest he had assaulted the appellant and threw him on the ground. There is no such evidence on record that complainant initiated the assault or was himself the aggressor or he grazed his cattle on the land allotted to the appellant so as to occasion the exercise of right of private defence of person or property by the appellant. ( 13. ) IN view of the evidence of injured Lalji Tiwari (P. W-1) coupled with the corroborative medical evidence, the finding arrived at by the trial court that appellant caused grievous hurt to Lalji Tiwari (P. W-1) by sharp cutting object like axe, does not suffer from any infirmity so as to warrant any interference in appeal. ( 13. ) IN view of the evidence of injured Lalji Tiwari (P. W-1) coupled with the corroborative medical evidence, the finding arrived at by the trial court that appellant caused grievous hurt to Lalji Tiwari (P. W-1) by sharp cutting object like axe, does not suffer from any infirmity so as to warrant any interference in appeal. The conviction of the appellant under section 326 of IPC, therefore, deserves to be affirmed. ( 14. ) AS regards the sentence, the record reveals that the incident of the case is very old of the year 1999 and appellant was of 60 years of age at the time of occurrence, by now he must have attained the age of 70 years, and he has also suffered imprisonment for five months and seven days. Therefore, looking to the extreme old age of the appellant and considering the fact that incident of the case occurred ten years back, it would be appropriate to reduce his sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone by him. ( 15. ) APPEAL is, therefore, partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant under Section 326 of IPC is affirmed. However, the impugned sentence of imprisonment of one year awarded to the appellant by the trial court is reduced to the period already undergone by him, but the impugned sentence of fine of rs. 1,000/- (one thousand) is maintained. Appeal is accordingly disposed of.