Anil Kumar Shukla, J.

Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.01.1995 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No. 220/1992, whereby & where under, after holding the appellant guilty for attempt to commit murder and injuries by knife to complainant Basantrao Gurjar and his son Vishwasrao Gurjar, convicted him under Sections 307 and 324 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 years and 2 years, respectively.

2. Conviction is impugned on the ground that without there being an iota of evidence, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned and thereby committed an illegality.

3. The undisputed facts are that complainant Basantrao Gurjar was residing in his own house in Tilaknagar at Chantapara, Bilaspur, in which the appellant was also residing as a tenant.

4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Basantrao Gurjar was residing in Chantapara. The appellant is son of the complainant's uncle. Due to non-payment of house rent for two months, a dispute arose between the complainant and the appellant, on which some altercation took place between them. On 13.05.1991, a quarrel took place between the complainant and the appellant on account of switching of bulb and on refusal of the complainant for switching of the bulb, the appellant assaulted him by a Knife, as a result of which the complainant sustained injuries on his stomach, left rib and left ear, hearing the altercation, son of the complainant, namely, Vishwas Gurjar (PW-7) came there for intervening between them, then the appellant also assaulted him with the knife. On hearing the hue and cry, Vijay Kumar Gurjar (PW-1) and Ashok Kumar Gurjar (PW-2) also came there and Ashok Kumar Gurjar (PW-2) took the complainant to Sardar Patel Hospital, Bilaspur for his treatment, where Doctor A. Sen (PW-5) treated the injured/complainant and thereafter Dr. R.A. Sharma (PW-11) examined the complainant and gave his report vide Ex.-P/5A. The doctor sent information to Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur. Thereafter, FIR (Ex.-P/11) for an offence under Section 307 was registered in the said police station. The police, after completion of the investigation, filed a charge-sheet under Section 307 of IPC before the concerned Court. Statement of the accused was also recorded under Section 313 CrPC in which he denied the guilt and pleaded innocence.

5. After hearing the parties and going through the record, the Court below has convicted the accused/appellant as aforementioned.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has not disputed the fact that the appellant had caused injuries to complainant Basantrao Gurjar and his son Vishwas Rao Gurjar with a sharp weapon. Learned counsel mainly argued on the point that the conviction imposed upon the accused/appellant under Section 307 IPC is illegal and the case may be punishable under section 308 IPC. He further argued that looking to the nature of dispute, it is clear that because of the sudden provocation the incident took place. He argued that considering the medical evidence, wherein the doctor has opined that the injuries sustained by the injured were simple in nature, the conviction of the appellant may be altered from Section 307 IPC to Section 308 of IPC. He further argued that the incident is of the year 1991 and at the time of incident the appellant was just 23 years old. At present, the appellant is a practicing lawyer and no fruitful purpose would be served in case the appellant is made to undergo the remaining jail sentence imposed upon him. Therefore, the sentence imposed upon him may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

7. Ms. Shobha Kashyap, Dy. Government Advocate for the State/respondent, while supporting the impugned judgment, submitted that the trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant and the same does not call for any interference by this Court.

8. Basantr