SOBHAG MAL JAIN, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 7th October, 1977, of the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara, convicting and sentencing the appellants as under: 1. Ladu Under Section 324 IPC one year's RI and a fine ofRs. 500/ -; in default of pay -ment of fine to further RI for three months.Under Section 324 IPC 18 months' RI and a fineof Rs. 500/ -; in default ofpayment of fine to threemonths' further RI.2. Kana Under Section 324 read one year's RI and a fine ofwith Section 34 IPC Rs. 500/ -; in default of pay -ment of fine to further RI for three months.Under Section 457 IPC 18 months RI and a fine ofRs. 500/ - in default of pay -ment of fine to three months further RI. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. The case relates to the incident which took place on the night of October 29, 1976, at the house of Mohanlal Harijan resulting in injuries to Mohanlal. It is alleged that Mohanlal on the night of the incident was sleeping at his house when the accused and one Ratna came there and caused injuries to him. They further bolted from outside the doors of the house where the other members of the family were sleeping. The First Information Report of the occurrence was lodged by Smt. Mohini, wife of Mohanlal Harijan at the Police Station, Phoolia Kalan, on October 30, 1976, on which a case under Section 307 IPC was registered. In the report the names of the assailants were not mentioned. Mohanlal at that time was said to be unconscious. On regaining consciousness his statement was recorded and the accused were, thereafter, arrested. On medical examination by Dr. P.J. Shah, Medical Jurist, one injury on the head of the injured was found by the doctor. The injury was described as simple. After investigation the police submitted a charge -sheet in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, I Class, Shahpura, who committed the accused for trial to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara.
(2.) THE accused was then tried by the Additional Sessions Judge for the offence under Section 307 IPC. After trial the Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the petitioners as aforesaid. The co -accused Ratna was also convicted under Section 324 read with Section 34 and 457 IPC but as -he was below 21 years of age, the learned Additional Sessions Judge released him on probation. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge the petitioners have come in appeal to this Court.
(3.) THE case against the petitioners depends on the testimony of PW 2 Mohanlal, who received the injuries in the accident. His presence at the spot cannot, therefore, be doubted. The learned Sessions Judge has placed reliance on his evidence and there is no reason for me to take a contrary view as regards the assessment of his testimony. The witness appears to be truthful and he has stated that it were the accused who caused injuries to him. The conviction of the petitioner Ladu for the offence under Section 324 and 457 IPC and Kana under Section 324 read with Section 34 and 457 IPC appears to be correct. As regards the question of sentence it is to be seen that the occurrence took place as back as October 29, 1976, and now a period of more than 8 years has elapsed. The petitioners are Harijans and are relatives of the injured. They have already undergone a sentence of more than 25 days, and it would not be advisable now to send them to jail after a period of more than 8 years. They are not stated to be previous convicts.;