- (1.)The deceased has been killed as a result of single gun shot. According to the postmortem report, the ante-mortem injury which the deceased suffered was as under :
"Gun shot wound of entry area 13/4 x 11/2 x cavity deep margins inverted lacerated blackening and tattooing present front of abd. left 3/4" at 2 o'clock to umbilicus and from left to right inward and backward. "

(2.)The facts in brief are that the wife and son of the deceased informed him when he returned home at about 7. 00/7.30 p. m. , that the appellant had broken their cakes of cow dung in the afternoon between 11. 00 to 1. 00 p. m. The deceased went to the house of the appellant to complain about it. He was accompanied by his son kishan Lat (PW2). There the accused abused the deceased and removed the gun that was hanging on the door of his house. Seeing this the deceased with his son left the house of the appellant. The accused went after the deceased. Again there was altercation on road. The accused was carrying the gun with him. He shot the deceased in the abdomen and ran thereafter. As a result of the gun shot injury the deceased died on the spot. The appellant was charged for the offence under section 302 IPC. He has been convicted by the trial court. His conviction has been upheld by the High Court.
(3.)Mr. A. K. Chitale, learned counsel for the appellant contends that it was an altercation on account of trivial matter of breaking of the cow dung cakes by the appellant. The submission is that over a trivial incident of this type a single gun shot was fired and it is not a case of pumping of the bullets by the appellant into the body of the deceased and thus it is evident that the appellant had no intention to kill the deceased. In this view, learned counsel contends that the conviction of the appellant under section 302 IPC is not sustainable and it deserves to be converted into one under section 304 part II IPC.