THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.874 of 2004 O R D E R: This Criminal Revision Case is filed against the judgment in Criminal Appeal No.223 of 2001, dated 06.05.2004 on the file of the VIII Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Guntur, whereunder the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal filed by petitioners herein, confirming the conviction recorded against the petitioners herein-accused Nos.1 and 2 in the judgment dated 27.03.2001 passed in C.C.No.110 of 1998 by the learned II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Tenali, whereunder the petitioners herein-accused 1 and 2 and A.1 were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 326 and 324 IPC respectively, and first petitioner-accused No.1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000 /-, in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 326 IPC, and A.2 was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer one month for the offence under Section 324 IPC. The first appellate Court, however, modified the sentence against second appellant into one of additional fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of the same to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. The brief facts of the case are as follows: “The accused are residents of Balijapalli village. On 21.12.1997 at about 9.00 PM the defacto-complainant Vejendla Venkata Rao along with Vejendla Malleswara Rao and two others were proceeding for tapi work and on the way, near the poultry form of Yerrababu, A-1 and A-2 came there on cycle, attacked the defacto-complainant and his brother Malleswara Rao with common intention to cause hurt to them due to enmity existing between them. A.1 uttered and said that they are supporting President, if he kill them now who will come to their rescue and so saying A.1 dealt a blow on the hand of Malleswara Rao with casurine stick causing bleeding injury and he fell down, Vejendla Venkata Rao intervened and A.2 beat him with iron rod on his left leg below knee causing injury.” The learned counsel for the petitioners does not press the revision so far as the petitioner No.2 is concerned. As far as the petitioner No.1 is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that both Courts erred in convicting the petitioner No.1 herein for an offence punishable under Section 326 IPC. He further submitted that it is categorically stated by the Radiologist/PW.8, before the trial Court that no fracture was sustained by PW.2, but the learned Magistrate, placing reliance on the evidence of doctor, convicted the petitioner-accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 326 IPC. It is stated by the doctor before the trial Court that the injury sustained by PW.2 is a grievous injury. For the purpose of deciding the nature of injury, whether it is simple or grievous the evidence of doctor alone is not enough, but the injury should come under the category mentioned in 320 of the IPC. Admittedly, the injury suffered by the victim has not come within the explanation of Section 320 IPC. In view of the above, this Court deems it appropriate that the petitioner-accused No.1 should be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC, instead of 326 IPC, and sentence should be accordingly modified. Accordingly, the petitioner-accused No.1 is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC and the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the Courts below is modified to one month. It is seen from the record that the petitioner –accused No.1 has already suffered one month imprisonment. In view of the same, the said one month period of imprisonment shall be set off and petitioner-accused No.1 need not surrender before the concerned Court. However, he is directed to pay the fine amount of Rs.5,000/- within three months from the date of the copy of the order made ready. As far as the second petitioner-accused No.2 is concerned, imposition of fine is not interfered with. With the above modifications, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. __________________ RAJA ELANGO, J 25th June, 2010. PNV