Judgment : 1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 05.01.2007 in C.C. No. 209/2002 passed by the JMFC, Molkalmur and confirmed by the judgment dated 08.03.2010 in Crl.A. No. 13/2007 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Chitradurga convicting and sentencing the petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC and to undergo to simple imprisonment for a term of three years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, for the offences punishable under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC accused No. 3 is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of six months and for the offences punishable under Section 506 read with Section 34 IPC all the accused are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of three months. 2. It is the case of prosecution that on 05.05.2002 at about 08.30 pm the accused assaulted P.W.3 and P.W.4, caused grievous and simple injuries and threatened with dire consequences to their life. After investigation charge sheet is filed for the offences punishable under Section 323, 326, 504, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. After framing the charges the prosecution examined 7 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.7 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7 and M.O.1 and M.O.2. On appreciation of the entire material on record the trial Court convicted the petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 326, 323, 504 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of the trial Court the petitioners filed an appeal in Crl.A. No. 13/2007 on the file of lower appellate Court. On re-appreciation of the entire material on record the lower appellate Court confirmed the judgment of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Hence, this revision petition. 3. Heard arguments on both the side and perused the entire record. 4. P.W.3 and P.W.4 are the victims who sustained injuries in the incident and they are also the eye witnesses. It is the case of prosecution that the accused Nos. 1 and 2 caused grievous injuries to P.W.4. In addition to the evidence of P.W.3 and P.W.4 the Doctor who treated them is examined as P.W.7. This witness P.W.7 in his evidence deposed that the Doctors in the KIMS Hospital at Bellary, on the basis of X-Ray opined that the injury No. 1 is grievous in nature. 1 and 2 caused grievous injuries to P.W.4. In addition to the evidence of P.W.3 and P.W.4 the Doctor who treated them is examined as P.W.7. This witness P.W.7 in his evidence deposed that the Doctors in the KIMS Hospital at Bellary, on the basis of X-Ray opined that the injury No. 1 is grievous in nature. The X-Ray and the report from the KIMS Hospital, Bellary is not produced before the Court. The Doctor who gave opinion on the basis of X-Ray report from the KIMS Hospital at Bellary is not examined. P.W.7 who was a Doctor at the relevant point of time at Molkalmur hospital who had only given first aid to P.W.3 and P.W.4 and referred the patients to the hospital at Bellary. Therefore P.W.7 has no personal knowledge with regard to the grievous hurt sustained by P.W.4. Further it is seen from the record that Ex.P.7 is the wound certificate issued by the Hospital at Molkalmur. This wound certificate specifies injury No. 3 as grievous injury. But in the evidence of P.W.7 it is stated that injury No. 1 as grievous in nature. Admittedly P.W.4 was referred to hospital at Bellary for further treatment. No Doctor is examined from the Hospital at Bellary and their opinion is not produced before the Court. In the circumstances I am of the considered opinion that both the Courts below committed a mistake in convicting accused Nos. 1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Section 326 IPC. In the absence of proof of grievous injury to P.W.4 I am of the considered opinion that the accused cannot be convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Section 326 IPC. 5. The evidence of P.W.3 and P.W.4 specifies that on the date of incident on 05.05.2002 they sustained injuries. Ex.P.7 -the wound certificate also specifies the injuries sustained by P.W.4. These injuries are simple in nature and therefore the conviction of accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC is proved and established. 6. The only allegation against accused No. 3 is that from his hands and legs he assaulted P.W.3. P.W.3 has not suffered any hurt and no wound certificate is produced in this connection. In the absence of wound certificate specifying the hurt caused to P.W.3 the conviction of accused No. 3 is bad in law. 7. 6. The only allegation against accused No. 3 is that from his hands and legs he assaulted P.W.3. P.W.3 has not suffered any hurt and no wound certificate is produced in this connection. In the absence of wound certificate specifying the hurt caused to P.W.3 the conviction of accused No. 3 is bad in law. 7. The material on record discloses that all the accused threatened P.W.3 and P.W.4 with dire consequences to their life. Therefore the conviction of all the accused for the offences punishable under Section 506 read with 34 IPC is in accordance with law. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case I am of the considered opinion that even the sentence levied requires modification. The incident had taken place in the year 2002 and we are now in 2013. All the accused are married and having children. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are aged more than 60 years. In the circumstances I am of the considered opinion that a lenient view is required to be taken. Accordingly, the following; ORDER i. Revision petition is hereby allowed. ii. The impugned judgment dated 05.01.2007 in C.C. No. 209/2002 passed by the JMFC, Molkalmur and confirmed by the judgment dated 08.03.2010 in Crl.A. No. 13/2007 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Chitradurga are hereby modified. iii. The conviction and sentencing accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC is hereby set aside. ii. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 are convicted for the offences punishable under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of 2 months and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-each and in default to pay the fine amount to undergo further simple imprisonment for a term of 15 days each. iii. The sentence under section 506 read with Section 34 IPC is hereby modified directing the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of one month and pay fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in default to pay the fine amount to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of 8 days by each of the accused. iv. The sentence shall run concurrently. vii. If the petitioners have already undergone imprisonment, they are entitled for set off of the same.