SHARMA, J. - (1.) THE appellant was put to trial before the learned Sessions Judge Ajmer, who vide judgment dated October 24, 1997 convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and fine Rs. 500/ -.
(2.) IT is the prosecution case that on July 1, 1996 at 10. 15 PM the informant Jeewan Lal (PW. 4) submitted a written report at Police Station Clock. Tower Ajmer stating therein that around 9. 30 PM accused Nand Kishore inflicted knife blow at the chest of Kishan Lal (since deceased ). Kishan Lal was removed to hospital but on the way to hospital he died. On the aforesaid report a case under Sections 302 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. After usual investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge Ajmer. Charge under Section 302 IPC was framed against the appellant, who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as may as 16 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellant claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and scanned the material on record. Indisputably the death of Kishan is homicidal in nature. As per post mortem report (Ex. P. 13) he received following injuries:- 1. Stab wound 5. 5. x 1 cm x ? deep on Rt. side of chest in its lower part anteriorly just above the subcostal margin. The wound obliquely placed on front of chest with its medial angle place lower to the lateral angle. Medial angle is obtuse and contused lateral angle is panted. The margin of the wound are clean cut, with a thin rim of contused abrasion all around the wound. 2. Scratch abrasion 6 x 0. 1 cm on Rt. side chest laterally in its middle at 5th intercostal spine area. In the opinion of Dr. P. K. Saraswat (PW. 13) the cause of death was shock due to excessive bleeding from intra abdominal injuries. Informant Jeewan Lal (PW. 4) in his deposition stated that on the day of incident around 9 PM he and Kishan Lal were sitting on the wall out of the house, at that time mother of Nandu came and asked Kishan Lal as to who gave beating to Nandu. Kishan Lal expressed unawareness and stated that Nandu might have fallen under intoxication of liquor, there upon she started abusing. Nandu who was 10 steps away then caught hold of Kishan Lal and both had grappled each other and in the meanwhile Nandu inflicted knife blow on the right side of the chest of Kishan Lal and fled away. Bindu (PW. 7), wife of Kishan Lal, corroborated the testimony of informant Jeewan Lal. In the cross examination she stated that the appellant and the deceased were friends and prior to inflicting single knife blow appellant and the deceased had grappled each other. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that the incident occurred all of sudden on a spur of moment when the mother of appellant and Kishan Lal had altercations. The appellant and deceased were friends. Since there was no bad blood between them, no case under Section 302 IPC is made out.
(3.) HAVING analysed the submissions and the material on record we find that the incident occurred on a spur of moment when mother of appellant asked the deceased as to who gave beating to appellant, the deceased replied that the appellant might have fallen under intoxication of liquor. Appellant who was standing nearby then rushed to the deceased and both had grappled each other. In the meanwhile single blow with knife was caused on the right side of the chest of the deceased. It appears that the appellant got enraged from the words of the deceased, lost his temper and caused one blow with knife and did not repeat the same. The appellant and the deceased were the friends and there was no enmity between them. The injury was caused without any premeditation. However from the nature of injury inflicted, the appellant should be presumed to know that his act of inflicting injuries was likely to cause death of the victim, even though he had no intention of causing death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, therefore the appellant is guilty of the offence punishable under Part I of Section 304 IPC. For these reasons, we partly allow the appeal and instead of Section 302 IPC we convict the appellant Nand Kishore @ Nandu under Section 304 Part I IPC and sentence him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer six months rigorous imprisonment. The impugned judgment of learned trial Judge stands modified as indicated above. .;