JUDGMENT Madan B. Lokur, J. 1. The Appellant is aggrieved by his conviction and sentence for an offence of murder by a judgment dated 23-8-2005 passed by the Sessions Judge, Karimganj, district Karimganj in Sessions Case No. 10/2005. 2. From the evidence on record it appears that there was some rivalry between the Appellant Birbal Kairi and Sri Kumar Bhar with regard to a girl named Rina Goala. This rivalry led to Birbal Kairi allegedly stabbing Sri Kumar leading to his death. Hence the conviction and sentence. 3. On 22-10-2000 the father of Sri Kumar lodged a First Information Report (FIR) to the effect that on 20-10-2000 while Sri Kumar was returning home he reached the front of Birbal's house where he was waylaid and stabbed in the abdomen and the chest and in the back by Birbal. Attracted by the shouts of Sri Kumar, several neighbors came to the place of occurrence and the father of Sri Kumar also came to the place of incident and took the injured to Ramkrishnanagar Govt. Hospital. From that hospital he was referred to the Silchar Civil Hospital but he died on the way. 4. On these broad facts, Birbal was charged with having committed the murder of Sri Kumar. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 5. Srikishan Bhar (the father of Sri Kumar) entered the witness box as PW-1 and substantially confirmed the statement given by him in his FIR. He explained the delay in lodging the FIR since he had to take his son to Silchar for treatment. He stated in his examination in chief that he found his son in Uma Shankar's house. He then took him to the Ratabari police station and then to the hospital (Ramkrishnanagar Govt. Hospital) and eventually to Silchar. In his cross examination, he stated that he found his son in an unconscious state in Uma Shankar's house. 6. We have seen the sketch map prepared by the Investigating Officer but find no mention therein of Uma Shankar's house and as such it is difficult to say how far or how near Uma Shankar's house is from the place of occurrence. However, it has come on record through the evidence of PW-7 Palua Kurmi that Uma Shankar's house is about 1 or 1½ furlongs away from the place of occurrence. However, it has come on record through the evidence of PW-7 Palua Kurmi that Uma Shankar's house is about 1 or 1½ furlongs away from the place of occurrence. This suggests to us that the injures caused by Birbal on Sri Kumar were not so serious since the victim was able to walk for about 1 or 1½ furlongs till Uma Shankar's house. Although there were several houses much closer, where he could have been medically attended to, Sri Kumar chose to walk to Uma Shankar's house. 7. We also find from the evidence of PW-1 Srikishan Bhar that Sri Kumar was taken by his father from Uma Shankar's house to Ratabari Police Station and thereafter to the Ramkrishnanagar Govt. Hospital and then to Silchar Civil Hospital. All this movement suggests that the nature of the injuries inflicted on Sri Kumar were not critical. 8. We have gone through the statement made by the doctor who examined Sri Kumar and we find that the injured was first taken to PW-6 Dr. I.A. Ahmed who admitted that in the requisition slip, he did not mention the treatment given by him to Sri Kumar or even the injuries suffered by Sri Kumar. The doctor who eventually examined the injured in Silchar Civil Hospital, namely, PW-5 Dr. Nilotpal Ranjan Roy mentions two injuries having been inflicted on Sri Kumar. These injuries are: 1) One penetrating injury over the epigastric region about 1½" x 1" x 3½" is seen after removal of bandage & blackish blood coming out. 2) Sharp cut wound 3"x1½"x1" over the back in the lumber region, cutting the left paravertebral muscle. 9. PW-3 Bikram Goala, who is the brother of Rina Goala is the only other material witness. He said in his testimony that Birbal had called the victim into his house and pulling him closer he stabbed the victim in the chest in his presence. When the victim fell down he was stabbed in the back. When this witness asked Birbal what he was doing, he was driven away. In his cross examination PW-3 stated that he does not know if his sister had any affair with Birbal or Sri Kumar. 10. When the victim fell down he was stabbed in the back. When this witness asked Birbal what he was doing, he was driven away. In his cross examination PW-3 stated that he does not know if his sister had any affair with Birbal or Sri Kumar. 10. While there is nothing on record to disbelieve the statement of PW-3 Bikram Goala, we find it rather surprising that he did not make any complaint to the police on the day of occurrence or even soon thereafter. The complaint was made only much later by the father of the victim on 22-10-2000. 11. Insofar as the other witnesses are concerned, they are only formal witnesses and did not actually witness the incident or contribute anything substantial to the case for the prosecution. The Investigating Officer appeared in the witness box as PW-8 but his examination in chief was extremely cursory and he did not advance the case for the prosecution, except to state that Birbal had made a confessional statement. However, the co0nfessional statement was not exhibited nor did the Magistrate, who recorded the statement, enter the witness box. The alleged confession made by Birbal, relied on by the learned Public Prosecutor has no evidentiary value. 12. However, in this context it is worth noting that in his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Birbal stated in reply to a question that the deceased used to frequently visit the house of Rina Goala and that he (Birbal) objected to that. Thereupon, the deceased threatened to kill him and this enraged him and, therefore, he killed Sri Kumar. 13. From an overall examination of the evidence before us, it does appear that there was some conflict between Birbal and Sri Kumar and this led Birbal to attack Sri Kumar with a sharp weapon, which may have been either a dagger or a dao. However, given the nature of injuries, the time taken to treat them and the manner in which they were inflicted by drawing Sri Kumar close to Birbal, it was certainly not his intention to kill Sri Kumar nor did he have the knowledge that his actions would result in the death of Sri Kumar. In our opinion, no case of convicting the Appellant under Section 302 of the IPC or even Section 304 of the IPC arises. 14. In our opinion, no case of convicting the Appellant under Section 302 of the IPC or even Section 304 of the IPC arises. 14. The only serious issue that arises is whether the Appellant could be guilty of an offence of causing grievous hurt to Sri Kumar. On going through the definition of "grievous hurt" as given in Section 320 of the IPC we find that the injuries given by the Appellant to the deceased would not fall in any of the categories mentioned therein. Consequently, it can only be said that the Appellant had voluntarily caused hurt to Sri Kumar by using a dangerous weapon such as a dao or a dagger and for this the maximum sentence prescribed by the IPC is three years' imprisonment. 15. In our opinion, on the facts of this case, it must be held that Birbal had injured Sri Kumar and is guilty of causing hurt with a dangerous weapon. We are told that the Appellant is already in custody for more than five years and has, therefore, effectively served more than the maximum sentence that can be awarded to him for this offence. 16. Under the circumstances, while convicting the Appellant of voluntarily causing hurt to the victim, we direct the release of the Appellant since he has already undergone the maximum sentence. 17. The appeal is disposed of. For the services rendered by learned Amicus Curiae, the Assam State Legal Services Authority will remunerate him to the extent of ` 5000/-. 18. A free copy of this judgment be supplied to the Appellant. 19. The Trial Court records be sent back immediately.