S. S. SHARMA, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal by the State is against the acquittal of the respondent by jjnd Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, in Sessions Trial No, 95 of 1980, vide his judgment dated 5/12/1980. ( 2 ) DECEASED Ashok Kumar and the respondent were residing in Ghuddeva, Police Chouki Banki Mogra, Tehsil Katghora, District Bilaspur, Ramikbal Singh (P. W. 1) also resides in the same colony. In between the quarter of the respondent and that of Ramikbal Singh there are two more quarters. Along with Ramikbal Singh his maternal nephew Nandbehari (P. W. 2) was also residing, Ramikbal Singhs wife and children used to remain in village. Ramikbal Singh (P. W. 1) Nanobehari (P. W. 2), the respondent and the deceased were employed in Chhurakachhar mine. The respondent used to live in his quarter along with his wife and children. The deceased also lived in a quarter in that colony. One Mahesh Singh also lived in that quarter and thus the deceased and Mahesh Singh were the only two inmates of that quarter. This quarter was opposite to that of Ramikbal Singh. The quarter of one Prayag is also, adjoining to that of the deceased. ( 3 ) THE prosecution story briefly stated is; that on 19. 4. 1979, at about 6. 30 to 7. 00 P. M. some quarrel had taken place between one Ashok on the one hand and the wife of Prayag and that of the respondent on the other hand. It is said that the deceased had: misbehaved with the wife of Prayag and for that reason these women were quarrelling with the deceased. At that time the wife of one Choudhary was also present. Ramikbal Singh (P. W. 1) on hearing this quarrel went there and pacified all of them and sent, them to their respective quarters. Ramikbal Singh also returned to his quarter. The deceased on going to his quarter got busy in cooking his meals. Nand Behari (P. W. 2) also went to the deceased and sat near him. ( 4 ) THE prosecution case further is that the respondent went armed with a knife to the quarter of Ashok Kumar and inflicted knife blow on the neck of Ashok Kumar. Thereafter the respondent fled away from the quarter of Ashok Kumar. Nand Behari (P. W. 2) also went to the deceased and sat near him. ( 4 ) THE prosecution case further is that the respondent went armed with a knife to the quarter of Ashok Kumar and inflicted knife blow on the neck of Ashok Kumar. Thereafter the respondent fled away from the quarter of Ashok Kumar. The deceased immediately pressed the injury by his hand and went to the quarter of Ramikbal Singh and told him about the respondent having assaulted with the knife. Nandbehari (P. W. 2) had also come to the quarter of Ramikbal Singh. Chandradeep Singh (P. W. 3) also reached the quarter of Ramikbal Singh following Ashok and Nandbehari, Ashok Kumar then fell unconscious in the quarter of Ramikbal Singh. This is said to have taken place at about 7. 30 to 7. 45 P. M. ( 5 ) RAMIKBAL Singh left his quarter for getting an ambulance. The ambulance arrived within half an hour or so and Ashok Kumar was taken in that ambulance from the quarter of Ramikbal Singh. On the way falls the residence of Dr. P. K. Mishra (P. W. 11) who was then working as Medical Officer in Western Coalfield Banki Mogra. As stated by Dr. Mishra (P. W. 11) the patient was brought to his house in ambulance on 19. 4. 1979, at about 8. 00 to 9. 00 P. M. He found the patient to be dead. He did not ascertain the cause of death and did not know even the name of the patient. He directed the driver of the ambulance to take the vehicle to the Police Chouki. Dr. Mishra also followed the ambulance up to the police chouki. ( 6 ) RAMIKBAL Singh, on reaching the Police Chouki Banki Mogra lodged the report Ex. P. 1 which was recorded by Head Constable Anoop Singh (P. W. 8) at about 9. 00 P. M. The distance of the Police Chouki from the spot has been stated to be 4 Kms. Head Constable Shrikrishan in the next morning held an inquest Ex. P. 8 over the dead body of the deceased. Thereafter the dead body of Ashok Kumar was sent to the hospital for postmortem examination. This Head Constable Shrikrishan then reached Ghuddeva colony and collected the blood stained plastered earth and unstained earth from the house of Ramikbal Singh vide memorandum Et. P. 7. P. 8 over the dead body of the deceased. Thereafter the dead body of Ashok Kumar was sent to the hospital for postmortem examination. This Head Constable Shrikrishan then reached Ghuddeva colony and collected the blood stained plastered earth and unstained earth from the house of Ramikbal Singh vide memorandum Et. P. 7. On the basis of report Ex. P. 7 which had been brought to police station Katghora by constable Lalji of Police Chouki Banki Mogra, S. I. Madan Singh (P. W. 10) registered the offence at the police station and then proceeded for Ghuddeva colony. When he reached there, Head Constable Shrikrishan was already present there from before. Sub-Inspector Madan Singh had taken with him the respondent from police Station Banki Mogra when he was coming to that colony. On reaching there the Sub- Inspector took over the investigation from Head Constable Shrikrishan. He interrogated the respondent and on his information recovered a knife which was hiden underneath a CHHAPRI in his house. The clothes of the respondent were also seized. ( 7 ) DR. B. S. Narwariya (P. W. 9) on 20. 4. 1979 conducted the post-mortem examination over the dead body of Ashok Kumar. He found as follows: (i) An incised wound over the supra clavicular mid region towards the left plural cavity upper apical lobe of left lung through the plural measuring as a whole 2. 1 x 0. 2 x 0. 1 linear scar mark over the anterio lateral aspect of neck left while wound coinciding the linear scar mark measuring 1/2 x 1/2 x 3 34 the plural cavity found full of blood clot. The upper medial apical lobe with pleura having penetrated wound up to posterior aspect of ascending arch of aorta measuring x 1/2. The internal injury corresponded to the external injury (ii) A lacerated wound over the maxillary bone prominence left measure 1/12 x 1/12 witti bruise around measuring 11/4 x. The doctor had also found rice and pulses in the upper portion of the stomach of the deceased. According to him the cause of death of Ashok Kumar was syncope due to hemorrhage. The incised wound was in the ordinary course of nature sufficient to cause the death. ( 8 ) AS stated by Head Constable Anoop Singh (P. W. 8) in the night of 19. 4. 1978 at about 8. 45 P. M. Mst. According to him the cause of death of Ashok Kumar was syncope due to hemorrhage. The incised wound was in the ordinary course of nature sufficient to cause the death. ( 8 ) AS stated by Head Constable Anoop Singh (P. W. 8) in the night of 19. 4. 1978 at about 8. 45 P. M. Mst. Elezebeth had also lodged a report Ex. P. 12 in the police station which was recorded by him in the ROZNAMCHA. As the report mentions her husband Mathes Ekka had also accompanied her. Mst. Elezebeth was sent for medical examination. Dr. Mishra (P. W. 11) had-examined her on 21. 4. 1979. He found an abrasion over the left elbow at the stage of healing. She complained of pain in the chest, but there was no external injury. There was a sprain at the back. Since the respondent had gone with his wife to the Police Chouki, Sub-Inspector Madan Singh (P. W. 10) while coming to the colony had taken him from Banki Mogra Police Chouki. ( 9 ) THE respondent in his examination admitted that Ramikbal Singh and Nandbehari were Jiving together in a quarter and that there are two quarters in between his quarter and, that of Ramikbal Singh. He has also admitted that the quarter of deceased is in front of the quarter of Ramikbal Singh. But for this, he denied the prosecution case and pleaded false implication. In defence he examined sub-Inspector J. S. Chouhan (D. W. 1) who was then posted at Banki Mogra. , He was examined to prove the statements of Ramikbal Singh and Chandradeep Singh which were recorded by him during investigation. The other witness examined was patrakh Kujur (D. W. 2 ). He has stated about the location of the different quarters and has further stated that from the CHAURAHA the person standing in front of the quarter of the respondent and Mahesh Singh cannot be identified. He has also stated that in the Churra kachhar mine there are three-four persons by name Ekka. In cross-examination he admitted that at the place where the respondent resides no other person by the name of Ekka resides. ( 10 ) LEARNED trial Judge found that deceased Ashok Kumar had met a homicidal death. He, however, did not find it to be proved that the respondent was responsible for Ashok Kumar's murder. In cross-examination he admitted that at the place where the respondent resides no other person by the name of Ekka resides. ( 10 ) LEARNED trial Judge found that deceased Ashok Kumar had met a homicidal death. He, however, did not find it to be proved that the respondent was responsible for Ashok Kumar's murder. He would have briefly stated the reasons on which the learned Judge rejected the prosecution evidence which was led to prove that the respondent had assaulted the deceased. ( 11 ) IN paragraph 19 of the judgment, learned trial Judge has observed that there is no explanation as to why Ashok Kumar after being assaulted went to the quarter of Ramikbal Singh for informing him that the respondent has assaulted him. He then referred to the evidence of Dr. Narwariya (P. W. 9) who had stated that there might have been profused bleeding at the time of inflicting injury. Referring to the doctors evidence, he also took into account his opinion that he could not say if Ashok Kumar after getting that injury could have walked a distance of 60 to 70 feet or not. Yet another circumstance taken into account by the learned trial Judge was that neither Ashok Kumar nor Nandbehari raised any shouts at the time when the injury was inflicted nor thereafter. This according to him was an unnatural conduct of these witnesses. On this reasoning, he concluded as follows:. . (Vernacular Matter Ommited ). . ( 12 ) IN paragraph 22 of the judgment, learned trial Judge observed that since the earth in Ashok Kumars quarter was not found to be stained with blood, hence the version given by Nandbehari (P. W. 2) about the manner of the assault does not appear to be truthful. He also observed that pastry roller (BELAN), utensils etc. were not seized from Ashok Kumars house which would have corroborated the version of Nandbehari. According to the learned trial Judge since rice and pulse was found in the stomach of the deceased which indicated that he had taken his meals about three hours before, there was no reason for Ashok Kumar to have again cooked his meals. This also was taken as a factor to reject, the testimony of Nandbehari (P. W. 2 ). According to the learned trial Judge since rice and pulse was found in the stomach of the deceased which indicated that he had taken his meals about three hours before, there was no reason for Ashok Kumar to have again cooked his meals. This also was taken as a factor to reject, the testimony of Nandbehari (P. W. 2 ). Further reasoning given was that if the respondent was the assailant, it would not have been possible for him to leave the colony along with his wife and reach the police station as if the respondent was the assailant, the persons in the colony would have soon after come to know about it. He has also found that Ramikbal Singh (P. W. 1), Nandbehari (P. W. 2) and Chandradeep Singh (P. W. 3) are related inter-se and the prosecution has not examined any independent witness. He has found Chandradeep Singh (P. W. 3) to be a got up witness who according to him went on attesting the PANCHAYATNAMAS at the instance of Ramikbal Singh. The doubt expressed by the learned trial Judge is that since blood stained earth was found from Ramikbal Singhs quarter there could be a possibility that Nandbehari and Chandradeep Singh have been made to give evidence by Ramikbal Singh. ( 13 ) AS we shall presently point out from the evidence, all the aforesaid reasoning are wholly perverse and most of them are even contrary to record. The learned trial Judge has not correctly marshalled the evidence inasmuch as that he has picked up certain sentences and ignored the other relevant part of the evidence. ( 14 ) DR. Narwariya (P. W. 9) in paragraph 14 of his deposition stated as follows There might have been profused bleeding at the time of inflicting injury. In the present case if Ashok Kumar after sustaining the injury would have put his hand on the injury it might be that the blood would not have come out from the injury. Learned trial Judge picked up the first sentence and ignored the other part of this paragraph. It is in the evidence of Nandbehari (paragraph 5) that soon after the infliction of the knife blow Ashok Kumar had pressed the injury by his hand. Learned trial Judge picked up the first sentence and ignored the other part of this paragraph. It is in the evidence of Nandbehari (paragraph 5) that soon after the infliction of the knife blow Ashok Kumar had pressed the injury by his hand. The location of the injury would go to show that if the wound is pressed the blood would not gush out so as to sprinkle on the earth, but the clothes would certainly get stained with it. The injury was inflicted when Ashok Kumar was in a sitting position and be bad immediately got up. He had pressed the wound by his hand. This is how the absence of the blood on the floor of the quarter of Ashok Kumar and his clothes being stained with blood are quite consistent with each other. The direct evidence of Nandbehari (paragraph 10) is that since Ashok Kumar bad pressed the wound by his band, the blood did not fail on the ground. ( 15 ) IN paragraph 15 Dr. Narwariya (P. W. 9), in answer to the question whether after sustaining the injury, was it possible for Ashok Kumar to walk a distance of 60 to 70 feet, stated that the could have or could not have. No definite opinion could be given. The doctor was also questioned whether Ashok Kumar could have become unconscious immediately, about which also he could not give any definite opinion. ( 16 ) ASHOK Kumar, as is mentioned in the inquest memorandum and the post-mortem report was aged about 24 years. Ramikbal Singh (P. W. 1) was then aged about 40 years. Ramikbal Singhs quarter was just in front of the quarter of Ashok Kumar. They had been working in the same mine. Obviously, therefore, their relations must have been quite cordial or even friendly. Nandbebari (P. W. 2) when examined was about 2s years of age. Though Ramikbal Singh was not questioned as to why did the deceased come to his quarter in that injured condition, but from his evidence it is clear that the relations between. Ashok Kumar and Ramikbal Singh were quite close and Ramikbal Singh being elderly in age there does not appear to be nothing unnatural in Ashok Kumar coming out of his quarter and going to Ramikbal Singh to tell him about the assault on him by the respondent. Ashok Kumar and Ramikbal Singh were quite close and Ramikbal Singh being elderly in age there does not appear to be nothing unnatural in Ashok Kumar coming out of his quarter and going to Ramikbal Singh to tell him about the assault on him by the respondent. Yet another circumstance that can be found to support this conclusion is that shortly before this incident, a dispute between the women folk as stated earlier had taken place in which Ramikbal Singh had intervened and had persuaded those women to go to their respective houses. Even otherwise, learned trial Judge should have better appreciated the evidence as had been given by the witnesses and should not have rejected the evidence on mere conjectures even without discussing the same. It is a matter of common experience that different individuals may act differently in a particular set of circumstances there we may also mention that there was nothing unnatural in Ashok Kumar and Nandbehari having not shouted. Since the assailant had already fled away, there was no question of any further danger from him. May be that Ashok Kumar and Nandbehari on that point of time did not realize the gravity of the injury. The assailant who was an inmate of that colony, was seen by them. Ashok Kumar followed by Nandbehari (P. W. 3) had immediately come out and gone to Ramikbal Singhs quarter which was at a quite short distance. Thus at this stage, there was no question of shouts being raised either by Ashok Kumar or even by Nandbehari. As a matter of fact Nandbehari was not specifically questioned as to why did he not raise shouts about the respondent having assaulted Ashok Kumar. Nandbehari in paragraph 10 of his deposition stated that when the respondent inflicted the knife blow on Ashok Kumar, he was stunned and, therefore, could not say anything. Thus, in the circumstances not raising of the shouts by Ashok Kumar and Nandbehari was of no consequence. ( 17 ) IN paragraph 23 of the judgment, learned trial Judge referring to the evidence of Head Constable Shrikrishan (P. W. 5) observed that if the version of Nandbehari (P. W. 3) about the deceased being assaulted while he was cooking his food was to be true, the Investigating Officer, would have seized utensils and the pastry roller etc. ( 17 ) IN paragraph 23 of the judgment, learned trial Judge referring to the evidence of Head Constable Shrikrishan (P. W. 5) observed that if the version of Nandbehari (P. W. 3) about the deceased being assaulted while he was cooking his food was to be true, the Investigating Officer, would have seized utensils and the pastry roller etc. , Shrikrishan (P. W. 5) in paragraph 13 of his deposition stated about the utensils etc. , lying near the CHOOLHA. Neither Shri Krishna (P. W. 5) nor Sub-Inspector Madan Singh (P. W. 10) were specifically questioned as to why those articles were not seized. In the circumstances those articles could not be sail to be such which required their seizure during investigation. Even otherwise by their non-seizure along with the direct evidence and the other circumstances could not have been negatived. As mentioned Mahesh Singh was also residing in that quarter with the deceased. ( 18 ) IN paragraph 24 of the judgment, the version of the prosecution witnesses about the deceased cooking his food at the time of the assault was negatived for the reason that Dr. Narwariya (P. W. 9) had found rice and pulses in the upper portion of the stomach of the deceased, au the basis of which he opined that the deceased must have taken his meals within three hours before his death. The deceased was an employee in the colliery and there is nothing unusual for such workers to take some little food, whatever may be available in, the house when they return from duty and take their full meals subsequently. The mere fact that some rice and pulses were found in the upper part of the stomach cannot do away with the requirement of the deceased to take his full meals in the night. There could as well be a possibility of the deceased cooking his food in the night so ands to enable him to take something in the morning before he leaves for this work or to carry that food along with him. This again was mere conjecture and surmise of the learned trial Judge. This also was a flimsy ground to reject the evidence of Nandbebati. This again was mere conjecture and surmise of the learned trial Judge. This also was a flimsy ground to reject the evidence of Nandbebati. ( 19 ) THE reasons given in paragraph 25 of the judgment to infer that the respondent had gone to the Police Chouki along with his wife prior to the incident are also wholly untenable. The learned Judge should have taken into account the fact that after being assaulted Ashok Kumar had gone to the quarter of Ramikbal Singh (P. W. 1 ). Then an arrangement was made to get the ambulance. Ashok Kumar was then taken to Dr. P. K. Mishra (P. W. 11) whose house falls on the way. It was from there that these people with the injured hold reached the Police Chouki. Thus some time must have obviously been taken for the ambulance to reach the Police Chouki. The distance of the Police Chouki was only about 4 Kms. Within that time the respondent Ashok Kumar who as stated by Chandradeep Singh (P. W. 3) had gone to his quarter from the quarter of Ashok Kumar could have well reached the Police Chouki before the ambulance reaching there. With that background the respondent must have gone to the Police Chouki with his wife so as to be not visible to others. There is nothing to indicate that the respondent along with his wife could go from his quarter to the police chouki from the front of the house of Ramikbal Singh where as the learned Judge says, some people may have collected. This reasoning also, in our opinion, is wholly fallacious and imaginary. ( 20 ) LEARNED trial Judge has also found Ramikbal Singh, Nandbehari and Chandradeep Singh to be interested witnesses. He has also drawn an adverse inference for non-examination of the inmates of the nearby quarters. Evidence of a witness cannot be rejected merely on the ground of relationship or interestedness. There is nothing to indicate that these witnesses were related to Ashok Kumar. Learned trial Judge should have tried to consider as to what evidence the inmates of the other quarters could have given. It is not at all borne out that anyone of the inmates of the other quarters had witnessed the incident. At best all that they could say was that subsequently they learnt about the respondent being the assailant of Ashok Kumar. It is not at all borne out that anyone of the inmates of the other quarters had witnessed the incident. At best all that they could say was that subsequently they learnt about the respondent being the assailant of Ashok Kumar. With the direct evidence being available that sort of a evidence of the inmates of the other quarters was not of much consequence. The discrepancy about the time of Ex. P. 2 and as started by Chandradeep Singh in his evidence is of no consequence. This discrepancy is very minor. The witnesses cannot be presumed to have a correct estimate of time and such mistakes are frequent. The inference drawn that Chandradeep Singh was giving evidence under instructions from Ramikbal Singh is wholly unjustified. The reason given by the learned trial Judge for setting up the witness is wholly imaginary and does not stand probabilized even remotely by any material on record. ( 21 ) THE circumstances which we have narrated and a perusal of the judgment of the learned trial Judge clearly indicates that the learned trial Judge without discussing and marshalling the evidence, on surmises, conjectures and imaginations rejected the prosecution evidence. Some of the reasons are even contrary to the material on record. It is also borne out that he has ignored some of the relevant parts of the evidence of some of the witnesses. ( 22 ) NANDBEHARI (P. W. 2) was present at the quarter of deceased Ashok Kumar when the latter was assaulted by the respondent. He had seen the respondent inflicting the knife blow to Ashok Kumar. Nothing has been brought out in his cross-examination which could in any manner throw any doubt on the veracity of this witness. His version stands corroborated by the evidence of Chandradeep Singh (P. W. 3 ). He had seen the respondent coming out of his quarter and going to the quarter of the deceased. He had also seen the respondent coming out of Ashok Kumars quarter shortly thereafter and at that time the respondent had a knife in his hand. He had also seen Ashok Kumar coming out of his quarter at that time with his hand on the neck and entering Ramikbal Singhs quarter. He was followed by Nandbehari. Chandradeep Singh had also followed them. ( 23 ) THE respondent was named by Ashok Kumar as his assailant. He had also seen Ashok Kumar coming out of his quarter at that time with his hand on the neck and entering Ramikbal Singhs quarter. He was followed by Nandbehari. Chandradeep Singh had also followed them. ( 23 ) THE respondent was named by Ashok Kumar as his assailant. In paragraph 25 of his crossexamination, Chandradeep Singh explained the reason as to why he did not talk to Ashok Kumar when the latter had come out of his quarter. The explanation given was that Ashok Kumar was swiftly going to Ram-ikbal Singhs house and to he could not talk to him In paragraph 32 of his cross-examination, he stated that he did not accompany Aihok Kumar in the ambulance because many others had got into it. This would go to show that Ramikbal Singh. Chandradeep Singh and Nandbehari were not the only persons, but others had also collected there. We have been taken through his evidence also and we are satisfied that nothing has been brought out to effect his veracity adversely. Learned counsel for the respondent with reference to paragraph of the statement of Nandbehari (P. W. 2) contended that Chandradeep Singh was not present at the time when the deceased is said to have given out the name of the assailant at Ramikbal Singhs house. Nandbehari (P. W. 2) in this paragraph denied that Chandradeep Singh had come after when Asbot Kumar had fallen unconscious. He was contradicted with his statement to the police (Ex. D. 2 ). In our opinion a reading of the portion, of Ex. D. 2 with which the witness was contradicted does not go to make out that Chandradeep Singh had arrived subsequent to Ashok Kumar having fallen unconscious. The words in the meantime in Ex. D. 2 (A to A) make the position clear. This does not support the contention that Chandradeep Singh had arrived subsequently. ( 24 ) RAMIKBAL Singh (P. W. 1) also corroborates the version of Nandbehari. He has stated about Ashok Kumar followed by Nandbehari having come to his quarter. He has also stated about the presence of Chandradeep Singh. Ashok Kumar in the presence of the other witnesses told him about the respondent having assaulted him with the knife, Ramikbal Singh had lodged the first information report Ex. P. 1 which lends assurance to his testimony. He has also stated about the presence of Chandradeep Singh. Ashok Kumar in the presence of the other witnesses told him about the respondent having assaulted him with the knife, Ramikbal Singh had lodged the first information report Ex. P. 1 which lends assurance to his testimony. There is a reference even of the quarrel between the women folk in Ex. P. 1. ( 25 ) THE main contention of the learned counsel for the respondent was that with the injury to the aorta it was not possible for Ashok Kumar to walk that distance as bas been stated by the witness or even to make any statement. He also referred to Modi's Medical Jurisprudence And Toxicology page 276m the heading Lungs. In our opinion, this contention does not deserve to be accepted. The evidence of Dr. Narwariya (Para 5) indicate that-the wound was up to posterior aspect of the ascending and of aorta measuring this indicates that the injury was not exactly to the aorta, but the wound was extending up to the as, fending arch of the aorta. Apart from this, doctor was not specifically questioned about any injury to aorta. In paragraph 15 of his deposition Dr. Narwariya did not give any definite opinion whether after this injury, Ashok Kumar could have walked a distance of 60 to 70 feet. According to him he could have or he could not have. He has also stated that if the injured had pressed his injury by hand it might be that the blood would not have come out from the injury. There is direct evidence about Ashok Kumar having walked that distance up to Ramikbal Singhs quarter arid having made a statement which we have accepted. The evidence of Dr. Narwariya does not in any manner negative that evidence. The injury also does not make out that Ashok Kumar would have immediately fallen down or become unconscious. More so when he had immediately pressed the injury by hand and but for the clothes getting soiled, there was not much of the bleeding. ( 26 ) SO far as the defence evidence is concerned we do not find any such thing which could negative tile prosecution story. ( 27 ) WE are, therefore, satisfied that the prosecution has been successful in proving that the respondent had assaulted Ashok Kumar with the knife. ( 26 ) SO far as the defence evidence is concerned we do not find any such thing which could negative tile prosecution story. ( 27 ) WE are, therefore, satisfied that the prosecution has been successful in proving that the respondent had assaulted Ashok Kumar with the knife. The injury was inflicted on a vital part of the body. As opined by Dr. Narwariya (P. W. 9), the injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Class Thirdly of Section 300 I. P. C. is clearly attracted and the offence in our opinion would be that of murder. The respondent is, therefore, guilty under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. ( 28 ) CONSEQUENTLY, this appeal is allowed. The acquittal of the respondent under section 302 I. P. C. is set aside. The respondent is convicted under section 302 Indian Penal Code. .