Judgment N.N.Sharma, J. 1. Ramji son of Raghubar Dayal, aged about 45 years resident of Nagla Maya, hamlet of Balpura, Police Station Ghiror, District Mainpuri has filed this appeal against his conviction under section 302, IPC by Sri O. P. Saxena, learned Sessions Judge, Mainpuri on 8-11-1976 in Sessions Trial no. 341 of 1976 ; appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for life. 2. Prosecution story briefly stalled is that deceased Kunwarsen, aged about 45 years was a potter while appellant is Gusain ; both of them were co- villagers; it was on 23-4-1976 at about 5 or 6 P. M. while deceased and his son Basdeo, informant, PW 1, were thrashing mustard seed at the platform adjoining his house towards west that appellant approached the deceased and asked them to give some garlic ; deceased refused alleging that garlic was not his exclusive property but he was a share-cropper only ; appellant was vituperative; Kunwarsen deceased took an exception to the abuses; appellant held Kunwarsen by his arm and dragged him below the platform and took out knife Ext. 1 from the fold of his DHOTI and dealt a heavy blow on the chest of victim; pulling; out the knife from the wound, appellant ran towards north-west ; he was hotly chased, chastised, out numbered and over-powered by Basdeo, Ram Autar, PW 2 Jagdish, PW 3 Murari Lal, Panchhi, etc., he was taken to the place where Kunwarsen was lying injured; Kunwarsen succumbed to his injuries ; informant seized blood stained knife Ext 1 from the hand of appellant and tied him with a string and made him over in the custody of his co-villagers J report Ext. Ka 1 was dictated by informant to Shyam Singh ; he carried this report to police station Ghiror where it was made over in the same night at 11.10 p. m. ; the distance of police station from the scene of occurrence was about six miles. Head-constable Niwaz Singh prepared FIR Ext. Ka 3 on the basis of written report and registered the case in general diary vide Ext. Ka 5; blood-stained knife was also made over at police station by informant at the same time ; it was seized and sealed up vide memo Ext. Head-constable Niwaz Singh prepared FIR Ext. Ka 3 on the basis of written report and registered the case in general diary vide Ext. Ka 5; blood-stained knife was also made over at police station by informant at the same time ; it was seized and sealed up vide memo Ext. Ka 5 in presence of Ram Autar, PW 2 and Gyan Singh ; writing of Niwaz Singh was proved by investigator Sri Sonelal PW 7, who was .acquainted with the same. Sri B. S.Sharma, PW 8, the than S. O. Ghiror made way for the scene of occurrence and reached the scene of occurrence at 1.30 a. m. ; dead body of Kunwarsen was seized and appellant was taken into custody ; an inquest was held on the dead body on 24-4-1976 at 5.30 a. m. vide memo Ext. Ka 10 ; dead body was sent for autopsy through constable Sughar Singh PW 4, and Sheesh Ram. 3. Blood stained and unstained earth was also seized from the spot and sealed up in presence of witnesses vide memo Ext. Ka 15. Siteplan Ext. Ka 16 was drawn. 4. Autopsy was held on 25-4-1976 at; about 4.30 p. m. by Dr. S. S. Agarwal, PW 6, the then Medical Officer, district Hospital, Mainpuri; probable age of deceased was about 45 years ; probable time of death was about two days ; deceased was of average built ; rigor mortis had passed off from all over the body ; following ante- mortem injuries were detected on his person : "1. Incised wound 4 cm. x 1.5 cm. x cavity deep on right side chest 10 cm. above right nipple at 11 O'clock position. The margins were clean cut. It was spindle-shaped. The upper angle of wound was sharp and the lower was blunt. The wound was vertically placed and was tapering upwards. The wound was situated in between II and III right rib space. On internal examination the doctor found that brain was liquified. Right side of pleura was cut under injury no. 1. Right lung was cut and punctured. Heart was empty. About 5 ors. of blood was found in chest cavity right side. Stomach contained about 3 ozs. of partially digested food. The gall bladder was empty and weighed 1 lb. 11 ozs. Right side of pleura was cut under injury no. 1. Right lung was cut and punctured. Heart was empty. About 5 ors. of blood was found in chest cavity right side. Stomach contained about 3 ozs. of partially digested food. The gall bladder was empty and weighed 1 lb. 11 ozs. Death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante mortem injuries vide post mortem report Ext. Ka 2 proved by doctor who conceded that the ante mortem injury was capable of being caused by knife Ext. 1 and was sufficient to cause death. 5. On completion of investigation chargsheet Ext. Ka 18 was submitted against the appellant. 6. In support of their case nine witnesses were examined by prosecution ; eye-witnesses who testified about the appellant being the author of fatal injury on Kunwarsen on 24-4-1976 at about 5 or 6 p. m. near his platform are PW 1 Basdeo, PW 2 Ram Autar and PW 3 Jagdish. These witnesses also apprehended the appellant alongwith knife Ext. 1 in the manner laid above. In bis statement appellant dented the presence of Basdeo on the spot ; he conceded that he did demand garlic from Kunwarsen who supplied the garlic to him ; he denied exchange of abuses between them ; he denied to have stabbed the deceased with knife Ext. 1 ; he alleged his implication due to ill-will ; he further alleged that Jagdish was own brother of Kunwarsen. 7. He further stated that wife of Kunwarsen was his BHABI ; at times he used to crack jokes with her; he was returning after selling vegetables ; Kunwarsen was thrashing mustard seed ; he cracked jokes with wife of Kunwarsen who took an exception to it; Kunwarsen dealt 5 or 7 blows with rod on him ; in order to save his life he dealt knife blow ; he again alleged that garlic was not demanded by him on that day but earlier 2, 4 or 5 days prior to occurrence; he further stated that he fell out with Gopi and Ajab Singh who caught hold of him on the spot; Jagdish, etc. returned subsequently from the field; knife remained in the wound ; in defence the appellant examined Dr. S. K, Gupta DW 1 to prove his injury report. Dr. returned subsequently from the field; knife remained in the wound ; in defence the appellant examined Dr. S. K, Gupta DW 1 to prove his injury report. Dr. S. K. Gupta happened to be Assistant Medical Officer, district Jail, Mainpuri on 25-4-1976 who examined the injuries of appellant in jail at 5 p. m. ; following injuries were detected on his person :- "1. Lacerated wound 2 cm. x 1/2 cm. x skin, laying on right side of scalp 10 cm. above the right ear, transverse. 2. Abrasion with scab 2 1/2 cm. x 1 cm. laying on posterior aspect of right shoulder. 3. Abrasion with scab 5 cm. x 2 cm. laying on posterior part of left shoulder. 4. Abrasion with scab 3 cm. x 2 cm. lying on posterior lateral aspect left elbow joint. 5. Swelling lying on while of right hand on dorsum. 6. Contusion 6 cm. x 1 cm. lying on lateral side left thigh upper part. Vide injury report Ext. Kha 3 proved by doctor who found that the injuries were simple caused by some blunt object; and were about 2 days old at time of examination. 8. Sri K. M. Sahai, DW 2, Judicial Assistant II, Mainpuri, Collectorate was examined to prove the endorsement made on special report Ext. Kha 4 by SRI B. S. Saxena, District Magistrate on 25-4-1976. He did not disclose the actual date when the special report of the case was received on that day. This evidence was adduced to show the delay in sending the special report to the office of Collector from the police station. Learned trial Judge observed that defence could not succeed in proving any unreasonable delay in sending of special report to the office of Collector from police station. No adverse inference could be drawn against the prosecution on account of any delay in sending special report, There was no evidence to show as to when the special report of the case was actually received in the office of the Collector. In the result conviction and sentence were recorded. We have heard Sri N. K. Bhasrgava, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned counsel for the State and perused the evidence on record. 9. On behalf of appellant it was argued before us that the injuries sustained by him justified the exercise of right of self defence. 10. In the result conviction and sentence were recorded. We have heard Sri N. K. Bhasrgava, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned counsel for the State and perused the evidence on record. 9. On behalf of appellant it was argued before us that the injuries sustained by him justified the exercise of right of self defence. 10. This contention is devoid of force; there is nothing on record to show that wife of deceased was sister-in-law of appellant; it has been shown above that deceased was a potter and appellant was Joshi Brahman as testified by Basdeo, PW 1. All the three eye-witnesses examined in this case negatived the defence suggestion that there was any assault on the appellant by deceased ; on the other hand they are unanimous of the point that appellant himself stabbed the victim with knife Ext. 1 and ran out but was chased, chastised, out-number and overpowered. Basdeo, PW 1, testified that he dealt blows on appellant with the rod ; Ram Autar also testified that when appellant ran out after removing the knife from the wound of victim Basdeo PW , snatched the knife and dealt blows with the rod on appellant, Jagdish, PW 3 made a similar statement. Learned trial Judge believed the testimony of PWs on the point that injuries on the person of appellant were subsequent to the infliction of fatal stab by appellant on deceased. We do not find any error in this appreciation of evidence by learned trial Judge specially when such explanation of the injuries of accused was laid in his written report by Basdeo So there is absolutely nothing on record to find that appellant had any apprehension of harm from the deceased when he plunged the knife in his chest. 11. Learned Advocate for the appellant further argued before us that the offence did not transcend the demain of Section 304, IPC. 12. 11. Learned Advocate for the appellant further argued before us that the offence did not transcend the demain of Section 304, IPC. 12. In this connection it is (significant to note that the belated explanation by appellant of the fatal injury of Kunwarsen did not mention that Kunwarsen hurled any abuses on appellant; it has been shown above that the deceased was a potter and appellant is a Brahman ; PWs 1 to 3 are unanimous on the point that when the deceased declined to give garlic to appellant he was vituperative; when Kunwarsen took an exception to it, he was dragged below the platform by the appellant who plunged the knife in his chest. Kunwarsen succumbed to his injury soon after. In Dibia v. State, AIR 1653 Allahabad 373 the appellant had dealt a blow with the axe on deceased ; fatal blow landed on the vital part of the body. It was observed at page 375 – "Causing of a serious injury on a vital part of the body of the deceased with a dangerous weapon, like an axe, must necessarily lead to the inference that the appellant intended to kill the deceased. He was, therefore, clearly guilty of murder." 13. In re Kudumula Mahanandi Reddi, AIR 1960 Andhra Pradesh 141 it was observed that Section 304 applies only to the following classes of cases :- "(i) when the case falls under one or the other of the clauses of Section 300 but it is covered by the exceptions to that section ; (ii) when the injury caused is lot of the higher degree of likelihood which is covered by the expression "sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death" but is of a lower degree of likelihood which is generally spoken of as an injury "likely to cause death" and the case does not fall under clause 2 of Section 300 ; (iii) when the act is done with the knowledge that death is likely to ensue but there is no intention to cause death or an injury likely to cause death. IN such cases there may be either no intention to cause any injury at all, or there may be an intention to cause simple or grievous hurt but not an injury likely to cause death." 14. IN such cases there may be either no intention to cause any injury at all, or there may be an intention to cause simple or grievous hurt but not an injury likely to cause death." 14. We have detailed above the ante mortem injury sustained by deceased ; according to the doctor the injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death ; it could not be shown to our satisfaction that it is a case which fell under any exception appended to Section 300 of lPC. In re Kudumula Mahanandi Reddi, I960 CrLJ 304 (Supra) it was observed :- "Knowledge and intention must not be confused. A men's intention has to be inferred from what he does, But there are cases in which death is caused and the intention which can safely be imputed to the offender is less grave. The degree of guilt depends upon intention and the intention to be inferred must be gathered from the facts proved. Sometimes an act is committed which would not in an ordinary case inflict injury sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause! death, but which the offender knows is likely to cause the death. Proof of such knowledge throws light upon his intention. Every person is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequnces of his act until the contrary is proved. It is therefore necessary in order to arrive at a decision as to an offender's intention to Inquire what the natural and probable consequences of his acts would be. Once there is evidence that a deceased person sustained injuries which were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, the person who inflicted them can be presumed to have intended those natural and probable consequences. His offence would fall under the third head of Section 300 IPC." We respectfully agree with these observations. 15. In Davasia Yoharman v. State, AIR 1958 Kerala 207 the accused at dead of night stabbed his wife in the middle of back with such force as to penetrate the spinal cavity and caused damage to her spinal cord : it was held that intention could only have been to kill her. 16. In the instant case, death of Kunwarsen is directly associated with the act of appellant. 16. In the instant case, death of Kunwarsen is directly associated with the act of appellant. The nature of weapon, seat and nature of injury and the manner in which without any provocation given by deceased he was violently dragged down from his platform and knife was plunged deep in his chest to cut right lung and pleura,, irresistibly leads us to hold that the injury was deliberately inflicted and was more than 'likely to cause death' and sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death and justified a presumption of higher degree of guilt. So believing the testimony of PWs we find that he was rightly held guilty of murder. In the result, we dismiss this appeal and affirm the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant by the court below. 17. Appellant is on .bail; let him surrender to his bonds forthwith and taken into custody to serve out the sentence aforesaid. Appeal dismissed.