JUDGMENT - VISHNU SAHAI, J.:---Through this appeal the appellant challenges the judgment and order dated 11-9-1996 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli, in Sessions Case No. 238 of 1995 whereby he has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default to suffer two years R.I. for the offence under section 302 I.P.C. Shortly stated the prosecution case runs as under :- The deceased Vikas Sathe was the cousin of the informant-Janardhan Sathe P.W. 2. At the time of the incident, both of them resided in Mhangwada of village Wategaon, Taluka Walwa Police Station Kasegaon, District Sangli and the appellant resided in Wategaon. On 26-9-1995 at 7.45 p.m. the appellant came on a jeep which he parked in front of Bajrang Restaurant in the square of S.T. stand, Wategaon. Thereafter, he came to bhellgadi of Yeshwant Sathe P.W. 5 which was located in the square of S.T. stand. An electric tube was lit in the said bhellgadi. At that time, the deceased Vikas was also there. At that very time, the informant Janardhan Sathe P.W. 2 after having a shave at Lucky Hair Dressers also came to the bhellgadi of Yeshwant Sathe and purchased chana of eight annas from Yeshwant Sathe. Thereafter, Janardhar Sathe and Yeshwant Sathe heard the deceased Vikas telling the appellant that he should pay the amount which he had taken on loan on which the appellant told Vikas that he would not return the same and he could do whatever he wanted. Thereafter, the appellant gave a slap on the face of Vikas and a scuffle took place between them. In the course of the scuffle, they came on the road. Janardhan Sathe, Yeshwant Sathe and others tried to separate the appellant and Vikas. At that juncture, the appellant took out a knife from the pocket and inflicted two blows with the same on the chest of Vikas. Thereafter, the appellant broke the buttons of his shirt; took off the same; and started moving his knife in the air challenging the persons who had gathered there that they should not come forward. He thereafter, ran away on the jeep. 2. Thereafter, the appellant broke the buttons of his shirt; took off the same; and started moving his knife in the air challenging the persons who had gathered there that they should not come forward. He thereafter, ran away on the jeep. 2. The evidence of Janardhan Sathe P.W. 2 shows that after the incident, he put Vikas in a rickshaw and took him to Kasegaon Police Station where he wanted to lodge his F.I.R. : but the police told him that first he should get Vikas treated and asked him, to take Vikas to Krishna Charitable Hospital, Karad. A constable accompanied Janardhan Sathe to the said hospital. At 11 p.m. Vikas succumbed to his injuries in the said hospital. The evidence of Janardhan Sathe further shows that after Vikas had succumbed to his injuries, he came to Kasegaon Police Station and lodged his F.I.R. 3. The evidence of P.S.I. Sampatrao Patil P.W. 6 shows that on 27-9-1995 at 12.15 a.m. while he was on duty at Kasegaon Police Station, Janardhan Sathe P.W. 2 came to the Police Station and he recorded his F.I.R. (Exhibit 16) as per his dictation. The evidence of P.S.I. Patil further shows that after recording the F.I.R., and registering an offence, he proceeded to the place of the incident and drew the spot panchanama Exhibit 6 and seized from the place of the incident, a pair of chappals and two plastic buttons of a shirt. He also collected plain and blood stained earth therefrom. His evidence shows that thereafter, the investigation was taken over by Dy. S.P. Dattatraya Mandlik P.W. 7. 4. The evidence of Dy. S.P. Dattatraya Mandlik P.W. 7 shows that he took over the investigation from P.S.I. Patil on 27-9-1995 itself. On the said date, he visited the place of the incident and recorded the statement of the witnesses, including that of Yeshwant Sathe P.W. 5. On 3-10-1995, Dy. S.P. Dattatraya Mandlik arrested the appellant at Peth Naka, while he was going on his jeep from Kolhapur to somewhere. On 7-10-1995, during the course of interrogation, the appellant admitted to Dy. S.P. Mandlik that he could produce the knife which he had kept at a place on Kasegaon-Wategaon Road. Accordingly, Dy. S.P. Mandlik sent for the public panchas out of whom Mussa Jamdar has been examined as P.W. 4. In his presence, he recorded the said willingness of the appellant. Thereafter, Dy. S.P. Mandlik that he could produce the knife which he had kept at a place on Kasegaon-Wategaon Road. Accordingly, Dy. S.P. Mandlik sent for the public panchas out of whom Mussa Jamdar has been examined as P.W. 4. In his presence, he recorded the said willingness of the appellant. Thereafter, Dy. S.P. Mandlik, the public panchas and the appellant on a police jeep proceeded. They went on Kasegaon-Wategaon Road and reached behind Vithal temple. From that place, the appellant took out a knife which he had concealed under a stone and produced the same before the Dy. S.P. Mandlik and the public panchas. The said knife was seized under a panchanama. During the course of the investigation, Dy. S.P. Mandlik sent the knife, plain earth and the blood stained earth and some other articles recovered from the place of the incident and the clothes of the deceased to Chemical Analyst. On 30-11-1995, Dy. S.P. Mandlik submitted the charge sheet against the appellant. 5. Going backwards, the autopsy on the corpse of the deceased Vikas Sathe was conducted on 27-9-1995 between 12.30 p.m. to 1 p.m. by Dr. Mohan Patil P.W. 1 who found on it the following ante mortem injuries :- "1. Sutured wound on right side of chest transverse over 4th and 5th rib. 8 stitches above right nipple 10 cm x 1/8 cm thorax deep. 2. Sutured wound on left mammary region transverse 2 cm x 1/2 cm 2 stitches." On internal examination, Dr. Patil found damage referred to hereinafter :- "1. Sutured wound as described in col. No. 17 corresponding internal injuries. 2. Skin muscle between 4th and 5th rib cut transversely stab in lungs on right side. 3. Intercostal muscle on left side cut below injury No. 2 on left side described in column No. 17. 4. On left side, described in Col. No. 17 stab injury right upper lobe 3 cm x 8 cm deep lung cut bleeding present. Stab injury in left lung upper lobe 3 cm x 5 cm lung cut bleeding present. Huge haemothorax left side 2 litres of blood present left side. Cut injury on anterior side. Heart has come out of pericardium, Heart empty, No blood. Large vessels contains blood." In the opinion of Dr. Stab injury in left lung upper lobe 3 cm x 5 cm lung cut bleeding present. Huge haemothorax left side 2 litres of blood present left side. Cut injury on anterior side. Heart has come out of pericardium, Heart empty, No blood. Large vessels contains blood." In the opinion of Dr. Patil the deceased died on account of haemorrhagic shock due to stab wounds in both lungs and injury to pericardium and the said injuries were possible by a knife (knife recovered on the pointing out of the appellant shown to him) and were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 6. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions in the usual manner where the appellant was charged for the offence punishable under section 302 I.P.C. to which charge he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. During trial, in all the prosecution examined seven witnesses. Two of them Janardhan Sathe P.W. 2 and Yeshwant Sathe P.W. 5 were examined as eye-witnesses. Remaining witnesses included, P.S.I. Patil P.W. 6 who recorded the F.I.R. Dy. S.P. Dattatraya Mandlik P.W. 7 and public panch. Mussa Jamdar P.W. 4 in whose presence, a blood stained knife was recovered on the pointing out of the appellant. Both P.S.I. Patil and Dy. S.P. Mandlik also furnished the evidence in respect of the investigation conducted by them. The learned trial Judge believed the evidence adduced by the prosecution and convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner stated in para 1 above. Hence, this appeal. 7. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire evidence on record. We are constrained to observe that we do not find any merit in this appeal. 8. The evidence on which the conviction of the appellant is founded can be classified under two heads :- (a) the occular account furnished by Janardhan Sathe P.W. 2 and Yeshwant Sathe P.W. 5; and (b) recovery of the blood stained knife on the pointing out of the appellant deposed to by Mussa Jamdar P.W. 4 and Dy. S.P. Dattatraya Mandlik P.W. 7. We now propose examining the said evidence. 9. We begin with the occular account furnished by Janardhan Sathe P.W. 2 and Yeshwant Sathe P.W. 5. S.P. Dattatraya Mandlik P.W. 7. We now propose examining the said evidence. 9. We begin with the occular account furnished by Janardhan Sathe P.W. 2 and Yeshwant Sathe P.W. 5. Since in para 2, we have set out the prosecution story on the basis of the recitals contained in their examination-in chief, we do not want to burden our judgment by reiterating all the details. Their evidence in short shows as under :- Yeshwant Sathe on the date and place of the incident had his bhellgadi. On the date of the incident at 7.45 p.m. Janardhan Sathe after taking a shave at Lucky Hair Dressers came at Yeshwant Sathe's bhellgadi and purchased channa worth eight annas. The deceased Vikas Sathe was there and the appellant also came there on his jeep. The deceased asked the appellant to pay the loan but, the latter refused. Thereafter, an altercation and a scuffle ensued between the deceased Vikas and the appellant but, before Janardhan Sathe and Yeshwant Sathe and some others who were there could separate the two, the appellant inflicted two knife blows on the chest of Vikas Sathe. He thereafter, pulled his shirt resulting in his buttons getting severed and brandished a knife challenging those present not to come forward. He then ran away in the jeep. Thereafter, Janardhan Sathe in a rickshaw took Vikas Sathe to Kasegaon Police Station but, the police told him that instead of lodging his F.I.R., he should first rush Vikas to Krishna Charitable Hospital, Karad. Consequently, accompanied by a constable, Janardhan Sathe took Vikas to the said hospital where Vikas died at 11 p.m. 10. We have examined the said occular account furnished by Janardhan Sathe and Yeshwant Sathe and we find that the same implicitly inspires confidence. The manner of assault as furnished by them is corroborated by the medical evidence. They stated that the appellant inflicted two knife blows on Vikas and the evidence of the Autopsy Surgeon Dr. Patil P.W. 1, to which we have referred to earlier, shows that the deceased died due to stab wounds which he had suffered. His evidence also shows that the said injuries could be caused by the knife shown to him. (Knife recovered on the pointing out of the appellant). Patil P.W. 1, to which we have referred to earlier, shows that the deceased died due to stab wounds which he had suffered. His evidence also shows that the said injuries could be caused by the knife shown to him. (Knife recovered on the pointing out of the appellant). The evidence of the said witnesses that after assaulting Vikas, the appellant pulled out his shirt resulting in the buttons coming out from the shirt in the process is corroborated by the evidence of P.S.I. Patil P.W. 6, the Investigating Officer, who the same night visited the place of the incident and recovered therefrom two plastic buttons. The evidence of these two eye-witnesses with respect to the place of the incident is corroborated by the circumstance that P.S.I. Patil recovered therefrom blood stained earth which he sent to the Chemical Analyst and on which the latter found human blood. Lodging of a prompt F.I.R. by Janardhan Sathe wherein the name of Yeshwant Sathe P.W. 5 is also mentioned lends assurance to the claim of these two witnesses that they saw the incident. It is pertinent to mention that the incident took place on 26-9-1995 at 7.45 p.m. and the F.I.R. was lodged within 4½ hours i.e. 12.15 a.m. on 27-9-1995 at Police Station Kasegaon by Janardhan Sathe. It is pertinent to mention the reason for not lodging it earlier has been furnished by Janardhan Sathe. He stated that when he, after the incident went along with the injured Vikas to Kasegaon Police Station, the police asked him to first get Vikas treated and hence, as advised by it, he took Vikas to Krishna Charitable Hospital, Karad. It was only when Vikas had succumbed to his injuries at the said hospital at 11 p.m. that Janardhan Sathe came to Police Station Kasegaon and lodged his F.I.R. 11. It is pertinent to mention that although the eye-witnesses were subjected to an extensive cross-examination but, nothing could be extracted therefrom which would discredit their claim of having seen the incident. For the said reasons, in our view the occular account furnished by Janardhan Sathe and Yeshwant Sathe inspires implicit confidence and is a very safe basis for sustaining the conviction of the appellant. 12. We have the bonus evidence in the form of recovery of knife on the pointing out of the appellant. For the said reasons, in our view the occular account furnished by Janardhan Sathe and Yeshwant Sathe inspires implicit confidence and is a very safe basis for sustaining the conviction of the appellant. 12. We have the bonus evidence in the form of recovery of knife on the pointing out of the appellant. We have seen that on 7-10-1995, during the course of the investigation, the appellant confessed before Dy. S.P. Mandlik P.W. 7 that he could (sic) the knife concealed recovered. We have also seen that at that juncture, the Dy. S.P. sent for public panchas out of whom Mussa Jamdar P.W. 4 has been examined. The evidence of Musa Jamdar shows that in his presence, the appellant stated that he had concealed one knife under a stone behind Vithal temple and could produce the same therefrom. His evidence also shows that the said willingness of the appellant was recorded in a panchnama and thereafter from the said place, from beneath a stone, the appellant took out a blood stained knife. We may mention that Mussa Jamadar is a wholly independent witness who had no rancour or illwill against the appellant and neither did Dy. S.P. Mandlik have any grudge or enmity against him. In the circumstances, in our view, they would not have foisted a false recovery on the appellant. We may also mention that the said knife was sent to the Chemical Analyst who found on it blood of A group, the blood group of the deceased. We say this because, on the banian of the deceased which was found cut, the Chemical Analyst has also found the blood of the said group. It is pertinent to mention that the Autopsy Surgeon Dr. Patil P.W. 1 found injuries attributable to a knife on the person of the deceased. In our view this recovery inspires confidence and is a very incriminating piece of evidence against the appellant. 13. It is pertinent to mention that the Autopsy Surgeon Dr. Patil P.W. 1 found injuries attributable to a knife on the person of the deceased. In our view this recovery inspires confidence and is a very incriminating piece of evidence against the appellant. 13. We make no bones in observing that the learned trial Judge acted correctly in convicting the appellant for the offence under section 302 I.P.C. In our view, since the appellant intentionally inflicted injuries sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death on the person of the deceased, his act would squarely fall within the ambit of Clause Thirdly of section 300 I.P.C., the breach of which is punishable under section 302 I.P.C. We have seen that the evidence of the two eye-witnesses shows that the appellant intentionally inflicted two knife blows on the chest of the deceased. We have also seen that the evidence of Dr. Mohan Patil, the Autospy Surgeon, shows that the said injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. We accept this evidence of the Autopsy Surgeon because, beneath both the injuries suffered by the deceased there was extensive internal damage to which we have referred to earlier. In our view, the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in A.I.R. 1958 Supreme Court page 465 (Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab)1, would be applicable which is in terms that if intentionally injuries sufficient in the ordinary course of nature are inflicted, the offence would be one under section 302 I.P.C. 14. We have no reservations in our minds that the defence suggestion made to the eye-witnesses, which was denied by them, is a tissue of lies. From the cross-examination of the two eye-witnesses namely Janardhan Sathe and Yeshwant Sathe, it appears that the defence case suggested is as under:- The said witnesses and some others started demanding from the appellant hafta (weekly payment) and when he refused to give the same, they inflicted fist blows on him; tore his shirt; the deceased Vikas rushed to the bhellgadi; picked up a knife which was lying there; proceeded to the appellant to assault him; and the appellant snatched the same from his hand in order to save himself and in the said process, accidentally the deceased Vikas received knife injuries. We may mention that the said defence saw the light of the day for the first time when the two eye-whiteness were cross-examined in August, 1996 i.e. nearly 10 months after the incident. In our view, if it had been true, then the appellant would have lodged a F.I.R. or pleaded it in his bail application or informed the Magistrate about it when he was produced before him on various dates of remand. The omnious silence of the appellant till the two eye-witnesses were cross-examined demonstrate its falsity. 15. We would be failing in our fairness if, before parting with the judgment, we do not refer to three principal submissions canvassed by Mr. Ranjit Bhosale learned Counsel for the appellant. He firstly urged that since Janardhan Sathe P.W. 2 and Yeshwant Sathe P.W. 5, the two eye-witnesses of the incident, were interested witnesses, we should not accept their evidence; more so because their evidence shows that the place of the incident was a crowded locality and they were independent who saw the incident . It is true that it appears from their evidence that there were independant witnesses of the incident but, merely because they have not been examined, in our view, would be no reason to reject the evidence of Janardhan Sathe and Yeshwant Sathe. In our view, the circumstance that they were interested would only make us evaluate their evidence with caution and not mechanically reject it. We dare say that this is the consistent law which has been laid down by the Apex Court. We have examined the evidence of the eye-witnesses with caution and we are constrained to observe that we find it credit worthy. We have earlier furnished our reasons as to why we have reached the said conclusion. Hence, the first submission of Mr. Bhosale fails. Mr. Bhosale secondly urged that the occular account furnished by the two eye-witnesses does not inspire confidence. He urged that they stated that the two knife blows were inflicted vertically by the appellant on the person of the deceased and the medical evidence belies this. We regret that we do not find any merit in this contention. It is pertinent to mention that no suggestion was put to the Autopsy Surgeon Dr. He urged that they stated that the two knife blows were inflicted vertically by the appellant on the person of the deceased and the medical evidence belies this. We regret that we do not find any merit in this contention. It is pertinent to mention that no suggestion was put to the Autopsy Surgeon Dr. Patil in cross-examination that if knife blows were given vertically the said injuries could not be cause in the absence of the same we are not prepared to accept the submission of Mr. Bhosale. At any rate, we would do well to remember the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in para 12 of the decision (Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai, appellant v. State of Gujarat respondent)2, reported in A.I.R. 1983 Supreme Court page 484, wherein the Supreme Court observed thus :- "Ordinarily, the value of medical evidence is only corroborative. It proves that the injuries could have been caused in the manner alleged and nothing more. The use which the defence can make of the medical evidence is to prove that the injuries could not possibly have been caused in the manner alleged and thereby discredit the eye-witnesses. Unless, however the medical evidence in its turn goes so far that it completely rules out all possibilities whatsoever of injuries taking place in the manner alleged by eye-witneses, the testimony of the eye-witnesses cannot be thrown out on the ground of alleged inconsistency between it and the medical evidence ." (Emphasis supplied) In our case, as we have seen earlier, according to the medical witness Dr. Patil, the injuries of the deceased could be caused by the knife shown to him. Hence, we find this submission to be devoid of merit. Thirdly Mr. Bhosale contended that an offence under section 304(2) I.P.C. would only be made out against the appellant. He urged that the incident took place all of a sudden and was preceded by an altercation and a scuffle between the appellant and the deceased. He also urged that the second knife blow was not intended to cause a serious injury. We may straight away mention that both the knife blows were intended to cause serious injury because beneath both of them the doctor found massive damage. In our view, no offence under section 304(ii) I.P.C. would be made out and only one under section 302 I.P.C. would be made out. We may straight away mention that both the knife blows were intended to cause serious injury because beneath both of them the doctor found massive damage. In our view, no offence under section 304(ii) I.P.C. would be made out and only one under section 302 I.P.C. would be made out. We have earlier in para 13 furnished our reasons as to why the act of the appellant would fall squarely within the ambit of Clause Thirdly of section 300 I.P.C., and an offence under section 302 I.P.C. would be made out against him. Apart from them, the post mortem report shows that two stab injuries were inflicted on the deceased; one on the right side of chest and one on the left side of the chest and as is apparent from para 5, massive internal damage accompanied both of them and they, in the opinion of the Autopsy Surgeon were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Had it been a case of solitary knife blow, we may have accepted Mr. Bhosale's submission. Hence, this submission is also rejected. 16. For the said reasons, we confirm the conviction and sentence of the appellant for the offence under section 302 I.P.C. and dismiss this appeal. The appellant is in jail and shall serve out his sentence. Before parting with the judgment, we would like to record our appreciation for the extremely competent manner in which Mr. Ranjit Bhosale, learned Counsel for the appellant argued what without question was a very difficult brief to argue. Nothing which could have been urged from the side of the appellant was missed by him. In case an application for a certified copy of this Judgment is made by the Counsel for the parties, the same shall be furnished within three weeks from today. Appeal dismissed. -----