JUDGMENT : B. Panigrahi, J. - The Appellant assails the order of his conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jeypore at Koraput in Sessions Case No. 72 of 1994 u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code, in short, 'IPC'. whereby and whereunder he has been directed to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. The prosecution case as narrated in course of trial is as follows: The Appellant and his wife were leading a very unhappy conjugal life which resulted in brikering, quarrel and misunderstanding before the date of occurrence. On 18.11.1993 morning the Appellant was found abusing and assaulting his wife despite protest by the neighbours. On that date at about 5.00 p.m., the Appellant is stated to have brought his wife outside, flung on the ground and assaulted on her chest by means of a stone (M.O.I), as a result of which she instantaneously died. This incident was witnessed by the neighbours and it was reported at the police out-post. A case was registered and investigation was accordingly carried on. During investigation, the I.O. visited the spot, seized the blood-stained earth, sample earth and the stone, despatched the dead body for post mortem examination and on completion of investigation placed charge-sheet in the Court. 3. P.Ws. 2, 3 and 4 are said to be occurrence witnesses. P.Ws. 2 and 3 have consistently stated about the assault given by the Appellant. From the evidence of P.W.2, it appears that she had been to the tube well around 12.00 noon, which was situated near the house of the Appellant. She noticed that the Appellant's wife was sitting in her house with the two children without taking food. At that juncture, the Appellant came being drunk and quarreled with his wife. Thereafter, he came to his front verandah when P.W.2 asked him as to why he was unnecessarily quarreling with his wife, to which he forbade to poke her nose in his domestic affairs. After some time, when she was proceeding to the thrashing floor, she found that the deceased was lying on the ground facing upward below her verandah. The Appellant was also giving thrusts on her chest by a stone. At that time P.W.3 was also present. After some time, when she was proceeding to the thrashing floor, she found that the deceased was lying on the ground facing upward below her verandah. The Appellant was also giving thrusts on her chest by a stone. At that time P.W.3 was also present. Now turning to the evidence of P.W.3, it appears that at the time of incident she was plucking tamarind from a nearby tree which was in front of the house of the Appellant. She noticed the Appellant bringing his wife to the front verandah of his house, laying her down on the ground and thereafter assaulting her by means of a stone on her chest. P.W.3 has also corroborated the presence of P.W.2. Thereafter, on a combined reading of the evidence of P.Ws. 2 and 3, there is no room for doubt that the Appellant dealt blows by means of a stone (M.O.I) on the deceased. M.O.I was seized by the I.O. during investigation in presence of witnesses and the seizure list was proved by P.W.4, Now, turning to the evidence of the Medical Officer (P.W.1), it is noticed that the deceased sustained the following external and internal injuries on her person: (i) Abrasion 2 cm. ? 1 cm. on the left side of the chest. (ii) Abrasion 2 cm. ? 1 cm. in front of the left side the chest. (iii) Abrasion of 2.5 cm. ? 1 cm. on the right axiallary area. (iv) Laceration 3 cm. ? 2 cm. on the right amiallary area. (v) Abrasion 2 cm. ? 1 cm. over the right side the cheek (vi) Abrasion 1.5 cm. ? 1 cm. over the right knee. 4. It is opined by the doctor, P.W.1 that the aforesaid injuries can be possible by two blows. learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant has strongly contended that in this case there were about six injuries on the person of the deceased, but the witnesses have only stated about two blows. In that event how can there be six injuries on the person of the deceased. On careful examination of the post mortem report, it appears that one fatal blow was noticed which has been described as Injury No. IV. The other injuries appear to be simple in nature. When a person after receiving such blow on his chest falls down on the ground, other abrasions and scratches might appear. On careful examination of the post mortem report, it appears that one fatal blow was noticed which has been described as Injury No. IV. The other injuries appear to be simple in nature. When a person after receiving such blow on his chest falls down on the ground, other abrasions and scratches might appear. Merely because the witnesses namely P.Ws. 2 and 3 did not narrate about the details of the injuries, we cannot doubt the probability of the prosecution story. 5. It has been brought to our attention that if an injury is caused by using 5kg. stone (M.O.I), then it would be very likely to have fracture on the ribs. But, it is found that no such fracture has been noted in the post mortem report. When there are direct testimony which prove the complicity of the accused, by taking into account the aforesaid hypothetical question, no doubt can be entertained on the prosecution case. In this case, be it noted that the defence did not put a single word to the medical officer for eliciting an answer if a stone weighing 5kg. is thrust on the chest, whether there can be any fracture on the ribs or not. In absence of the medical evidence, only on the basis of the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, we cannot, however enter into the realm of such discussion. Such a question has also been discussed in a decision reported in Bajwa and Others Vs. State of U.P., wherein it has been held that when there is direct evidence which is reliable, credible and trustworthy, on the basis of medical evidence, such direct evidence cannot be thrown over-board. 6. In the present case, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant has been unable to place any circumstance to discredit the testimony of P.Ws. 2 and 3. who are the next door neighbours and had no axe to grind against the Appellant. 7. While winding up his argument, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant has fervently pleaded that it is a fit case where the conviction and sentence should be altered from Section 302, IPC to Section 304, Part I or Part-II, IPC. But from the evidence, we found that although the Appellant and his wife might have quarreled previously, but at the time of incident there was no quarrel. But from the evidence, we found that although the Appellant and his wife might have quarreled previously, but at the time of incident there was no quarrel. The deceased was defenceless and she was brought to the verandah where she was assaulted by a stone on her chest. The intention and knowledge that such injury can cause death can well be presumed from the surrounding circumstances. 8. In the result, we have no other option but to hold that the Appellant was guilty for committing the offence of murder of his own wife punishable u/s 302, IPC. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed. The order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge are hereby confirmed. P.K. Misra, J. 9. I agree. Final Result : Dismissed