1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. ORDER Ashok Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan SB CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.74/1986. Under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. DATE OF ORDER: 23rd September, 2008. PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. PATHAK Mr. N.C. Choudhary for the appellant. Mr. B.K. Sharma PP for the State. BY THE COURT: This criminal appeal under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been directed against the judgment dated 4.2.1986 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District Jaipur whereby the accused appellant has been convicted and sentenced under section 326 IPC for a period of two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month rigorous imprisonment. On the request of both the sides, the matter has been heard finally as it has become quite old. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the conviction has been recorded under section 326 IPC, the incident is of 1983 and more than 25 years have elapsed, therefore, the accused has sufficiently suffered the trial and agony in the case. It is contended that he does not wish to challenge the 2 conviction recorded in this case but submits that since the accused is in jail for more than three months, therefore, ends of justice would meet in case his sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him in jail. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor contends that the learned trial court has correctly convicted and sentenced the accused under section 326 IPC. It is submitted that the fine imposed in this case is only Rs.100/-, that requires to be enhanced in the facts and circumstances of the case. I have considered the submissions made before me. The prosecution case is that the accused inflicted a knife blow on the person of Umardeen and in this regard FIR was lodged in the concerned police station under section 307 IPC. The injured died in hospital on 15.12.1983. The cause of death was shock and septicemia. After completion of investigation, charge- sheet was filed against four persons. The charge under section 302 IPC was framed against the accused appellant and against other accused under section 302/34 IPC. The accused denied the charge. In all 13 witnesses were produced in evidence. After close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein accused stated that he was falsely implicated in the case. In defence 3 witnesses were produced. The learned trial court after hearing both the sides acquitted all the accused from the charge under section 302 and 302/34 IPC and convicted the accused-appellant under section 326 IPC vide 3 judgment and order dated 4.2.1986. In the present case, it has not been disputed before me that the cause of death was not the injury sustained by the accused during the course of incident. The cause of death as per the statement of PW-11 Dr. B.M. Gupta was shock and septicemia. It appears that the learned trial court in the above circumstances, taking into consideration the injuries convicted the accused under section 326 IPC. The conviction has rightly been recorded by the learned trial court. The question now in the facts and circumstances of the case which requires for consideration is as to whether the period of sentence already undergone by the accused in the jail is sufficient or the same is required to be maintained. This matter pertains to the year 1983 and since then the accused-appellant is facing criminal proceedings. It has not been brought to my notice that the accused-appellant is a man of criminal antecedents. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him with an enhanced fine of Rs.1,000/- instead of Rs.100/- as awarded shall meet the ends of justice. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the accused-appellant under section 326 IPC is maintained. The sentence awarded by the learned trial court to the accused-appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him in jail and a fine of Rs.100/- as awarded is enhanced to 4 Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo further one month simple imprisonment. One month time is granted to the accused-appellant to deposit the fine before the learned trial court. On failure of the accused-appellant to deposit the fine within one month before the learned trial court, the learned trial court shall take necessary steps. The impugned judgment stands modified to the above extent. (S.P. PATHAK),J.