The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the injury to endanger life or cause severe bodily pain for twenty days, as per the definition of 'grievous hurt' under Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code.

1. The present criminal revision application, under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) has been filed against the judgment and order, dated 19.11.2005, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. V, Bhagalpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 20025/Trial No. 04 of 2005, whereby it has upheld the judgment and order of the learned Trial Court, dated 07.08.2002, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bhagalpur, in Trial No. 291 of 2002, whereby the learned Trial Court has recorded conviction of the appellant of the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 326 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and has sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months, for the offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1½ years for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. For the offence punishable under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, sentence is of rigorous imprisonment for a term of one month.

2. This is to be noted that this criminal revision application was earlier heard by this Court. This Court, by an oral judgment and order, dated 18.08.2015, had, without interfering with the findings of conviction, ordered for reduction of the sentence to the period already undergone by the petitioner. The informant, thereafter, approached Supreme Court by preferring an appeal, giving rise to Criminal Appeal No. 716 of 2017. The Supreme Court, by order, dated 07.04.2017, has passed following order:-

“We find from the reading of the impugned order that the appellant herein was convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 323, 324, 326 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months, 1½ years, 3 years and 1 years respectively for the aforesaid offences. The first appeal was dismissed by the Sessions Court. Thereafter, the appellant filed criminal revision petition, which has been dismissed by the High Court in one line i.e. “Having gone through the judgment of conviction, I do not find any reason for interference with the same”. This is clearly a non-speaking order passed by the High Court and we, accordingly, set aside the impugned order on this ground alone and remit the case back to the High Court for consideration of the revision petition afresh on merits.

It may also be recorded that the High Court had by impugned order reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant. It is made clear that even this order is set aside and when the High Court considers the criminal revision petition afresh it would be open to the High Court to go into the aspect o sentence as well.”

3. It is in the background of the said order, dated 07.04.2017, of the Supreme Court, that this matter has been placed again for final hearing and disposal and is being disposed of, after having heard learned Counsel for the parties.

4. I have heard Mr. B.P. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. I.P. Mandal, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the informant and Ms. (Dr.) Indiwar Kumari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the State of Bihar.

5. Mr. B. P. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has, at the very outset, agreed that there being concurrent findings of facts recorded by the Courts below, it is difficult for him to successfully assail the said findings to the extent the petitioner has been held guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. He, however, submits that so far as conviction of the petitioner of the offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, the same is unsustainable since essential ingredients of Section 327 of the Indi