JUDGMENT 1. - The learned Addl. Sessions Judge under its judgment date 20th April, 1991 convicted the accused appellantunder section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine or Rs. 500/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The accused appellant was further convictedunder section 4/25 of the Indian Arms Act and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The substantive sentences on both the counts were ordered to run concurrently. 2. There is no dispute that the deceased Vijay Kumar died an unnatural death. It is the case of the prosecution that on 8th September, 1988 at about 10.20 p.m. in the city of Ajmer near Hand pump at Nawab ka Beda, the deceased Vijay Kumar and the accused appellant Mahendra Kumar were talking with each other and there was some exchange of abused in between them and the accused-appellant is said to have taken a knife from his pocket and stabbed in the chest of the deceased. The occurrence is said to have been witnessed by Anand Singh (P.W. 7), Tarachand (P.W. 11) and Tarachand S/o Mangal (P.W. 12). Rajendra Kumar (P.W. 4) who is the real brother of the deceased was informed by Tara Chand (P.W. 11) about the incident. Rajendra Kumar went on the spot and saw that his brother Vijay Kumar was lying with an injury on his chest by knife and the blood was coming out of that injury. Soon thereafter police arrived at and Rajendra Kumar lodged a report and a case was registered and investigation was set in motion. 3. Vijay Kumar died and post-mortem was conducted, but because the post-mortem reports was an admitted document, the doctor was not produced to prove it. It will appear from the post-mortem report Ex. P.17 of deceased Vijay Kumar that in the opinion of the doctor, the deceased had died 12-18 hours prior to the post-mortem and the doctor found that there was a stab wound 2'h X 1'/4cros X depth on exploration in IV D.L.S. two cms. below left nipple and 6 cms. lateral to midline (mid stinnal line). There were two injuries also out of which one was an old infected wound on right big toe and the other was an abrasion 2 X 1 cm. below left nipple and 6 cms. lateral to midline (mid stinnal line). There were two injuries also out of which one was an old infected wound on right big toe and the other was an abrasion 2 X 1 cm. So far as third injury was concerned, it was an old injury. On exploration of injury No. 1, the doctor found that it was covered with clotted blood and on dissection a track of stab traverses through chest wall, pleura, pericardium and left ventricle of heart (lower part of it, through and through). Entire track was soaked up with thick dark blood, and pericardial cavity contained thick blood about 700 ms. Track of stab traverse inwards, downwards and medially into lower part of left ventricle. Wound of entry was 21/4 X 1/2, cm. and wound of exit on back of its. Ventricle was 11/4 Xth cm. with piercing of full thickness of anterior and posterior walls of ventricles. Ventricle (left) was empty and thoracic cavity contained free blood about 1500 ml. lungs were seen pale. Other abdominal viscera were also pale. Track of stab was 12 ems. deep into chest. In the opinion of the doctor the cause of death was shock due to excessive hemorrhage as a result of injury to vital organ i.e. heart. 4. The accused was tried and he pleaded not guilty and after the close of the prosecution evidence his statementunder section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded. He stood on a plea of bare denial. He stated that the witnesses are the relatives of the deceased and because of the enmity they are against him. He did not examine any witness in defence. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced him as aforesaid. 5. The learned Counsel for the accused-appellant has tried to challenge the evidence of two eyewitnesses namely (P.W. 7) Anand and (P.W.11)Tara Chand on the ground that both are relatives of the deceased. After having heard the learned Counsel and having gone through the statements, only on the ground that they are relatives of the deceased, when there is no material that they bear any ill-will against the accused appellant, we do not agree with the learned Counsel and we may say that the F.I.R. was lodged when Tara Chand (P.W. 11) had gone to the house of the deceased and informed Rajendra Kumar about the incident. Tara Chand (P.W. 11) has stated that he has witnessed the occurrence and he had gone to the house of Tara Chand and informed Rajendra Kumar and Rajendra Kumar came to the spot. Rajendra Kumar P. W .4 though is not an eye-witness, but he states that immediately after the occurrence Tara Chand had come to him and it was the accused-appellant who had stabbed the deceased and deceased was lying. 6. The next contention of the learned Counsel for the accused-appellant is that assuming that the accused is the author of the fatal blow to the deceased, the case will not travel beyond Section Part II I.P.C. because (P.W. 11) Tara Chand in his statement has stated that both the deceased and the accused-appellant were abusing each other, and were also grappling with each other. It was also stated in the cross-examination that the deceased had abused the mother of the accused-appellant and on this they grappled with each other and the deceased was holding the accused with his neck. At that point of time, the accused-appellant had given a single blow by knife on the chest of the deceased. He, therefore, contends that the case of the accused-appellant is covered under the explanation 4 to Section 300 I.P.C. From the perusal of the record, it cannot be said that there was previous enmity in between the accused-appellant and the deceased. The occurrence had taken place all of a sudden. It is not known as to what was the cause of the quarrel. The deceased is said to have abused the mother of the accused-appellant. Under these circumstances, we are in agreement with the learned Counsel that the case is covered under Exception 4 of Section I.P.C. 7. But, in our opinion it is not a case which fallunder section 302 Part 11 I.P.C. but will fallunder section 302 Part I I.P.C. The reason is that the deceased was unarmed, they were only grappling, the chest is vital part of the body and the nature of injury will show that the wound was 12 cm. deep and has pierced the heart. There was profound bleeding and vital organ was damaged. In our opinion, there can be no doubt that the accused intended to cause an injury which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. deep and has pierced the heart. There was profound bleeding and vital organ was damaged. In our opinion, there can be no doubt that the accused intended to cause an injury which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. At any rate, the accused intended to cause injury which he knew to be likely to cause death. 8. Consequently, we hereby partly allow this appeal and convert the conviction of the accused appellant from Section to Section Part I I.P.C. and sentence him to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment. The learned Trial Court is directed to issue amended warrant.Appeal partly allowed. *******