JUDGMENT R.K. Merathia, & R.R. Prasad, JJ. This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 4.7.2001 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Godda in Sessions Case No. 92 of 1999/15 of 1999 convicting the appellants under Sections 302 and 307134 of I.P.C. and sentencing them to undergo R.1. for life under Section 302 and R.1. for ten years under Section 307 of I.P.C. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. Mr. Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that at best the appellants could be convicted under Section 304 Part (II) and 324 of the I.P.C. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the State supported the impugned judgment. 4. Admittedly, the alleged occurrence took place on 5.12.1998 during quarrel and dispute over cutting of paddy between the parties. P.W. 1 is the only injured eyewitness. Though in the F.I.R., it is said that the appellants caused injury by lathi and knife, but P.W.1 said that the appellants had lathi in their hands. doctor found three injuries on the deceased i.e.: (i) stitched wound-1" below right eye and over right side of face, (ii) stitched wound-1/2" over right side of frontal scalp with swelling of frontal scalp-2" x 2" with diffused margin over the right side, (iii) stitched wound below the right side of nose. The cause of death was shock and haemorrhage as a result of head injury with fracture of frontal skull, which was grievous in nature. 5. In the circumstances, the case falls under Exception 4 of Section 300 of I.P.C. As already noticed, the occurrence took place during quarrel between the parties and the appellants did not act in unusual manner. 6. Accordingly, the conviction under Section 302 of "I.P.C. is altered to 304 Part-II of I.P.C. 7. The injuries on P.W. 1 were simple in nature but there were repetition of blows on the head. In the circumstances, the conviction under Section 307 of I.P.C. is altered to Section 324 of I.P.C. 8. So far as the sentence is concerned, Mr. Choudhary submitted that appellants have remained in jail for about 12 years. In the circumstances, the appellants are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. The appellants will be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.