Short Note : 1. Against Sawai there was an imputation that he was attempting to abduct Beejabai wife of the appellant Jalim. In the evening of 26-4-1976, the two appellants and one Lalaram, armed with pestle, axe and Lathi came to the house of the deceased. Appellant Chintu dealt a blow on the head of the deceased with the handle of the axe. Appellant Jalim and Lalaram also assaulted him with Lathi and pestle, resulting in the death of Sawai, Appellants were convicted under section 304 Part II read with section 34 IPC, Held: The question is about the nature of the acts of the appellants. It is clear that the deceased and the appellants are close relations. The quarrel developed suddenly and there could be no intention to kill Sawai. Moreover, the prosecution evidence is not definite about the person who had given the fatal blow. The prosecution evidence implicated Lalaram who is said to have given 2 or 3 Danda blows on the deceased. He is not before the Court. The possibility that his blows could have caused the serious fractures cannot be excluded in this case. The deceased was suspected of attempting to abduct the wife of Jalim and a quarrel preceded immediately the attack. In the circumstances, it appears that the two appellants wanted to beat Sawai who was being suspected of attempting to abduct the wife of Jalim. In these circumstances, even knowledge to kill the deceased could not be held to be proved. However, by attacking a person on the head with Lathi and pestle, it could re-presumed that they had intended to cause grievous hurt and the medical evidence also established that there were serious fractures of the skull bone. Since this intention is manifest and since it is not clear as to whose blow caused the fatal injury, it will be safe to conclude that the two appellants had voluntarily caused grievous hurt and their conviction could properly be recorded under section 325/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Appeal partly allowed.