JUDGMENT GOVIND MATHUR, J. This appeal is preferred to assail the judgment and order dated 27-1-2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Rajsamand convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302, Indian Penal Code for life term with fine of Rs. 1000/- and further to undergo three months additional imprisonment in event of default in payment of fine. Conviction is also recorded for an offence punishable under Section 341, Indian Penal Code and for that a sentence of three months imprisonment with fine of Rs. 100/- is awarded. 2. The facts as unfolded in the judgment impugned are that on 10-6-2004 oral statement (Ex. P/21) of Shri Singa was reduced in writing by incharge Police Station Bekaria at Primary Health Centre, Malva. As per the statement, accused Natha with Uda and 2-3 other persons restricted Singa on way on 9-6-2004 at about 8:00 p.m. An axe blow was given by Natha towards the head of Singa and that was resisted by putting hands ahead. Consequent to the blow aforesaid Singa received an injury near his ear. A lathi blow then was given by Uda on the head of Singa, consequent to which he fell down and then he was severely beaten by Natha and Uda with lathis. On making alram Jeeva and Goma rushed towards the spot of occurrence and on seeing them the accused fled from the spot. 3. On basis of the statement reduced in writing (Ex. P/21), a case was lodged warranting investigation for the offence punishable under Sections 307/34, 325, 323 and 341, Indian Penal Code, however, as a consequent to death of Singa on 12-6-2004 while availing treatment, investigation was launched for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 and 341, Indian Penal Code. 4. The investigating agency after completing the investigation submitted a report as per provisions of Section 173, Cr. P. C. to the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gogunda, that committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Udaipur. 5. After hearing counsel for the parties the Sessions Court framed charges against Natha and Uda for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 302/34, Indian Penal Code. On denial of the charges, trial commenced as desired. 6. After recording statements of PW-1 Dr. Kishan Lal Dhanak, PW-2 Dr. Naresh Kadam and PW-3. 5. After hearing counsel for the parties the Sessions Court framed charges against Natha and Uda for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 302/34, Indian Penal Code. On denial of the charges, trial commenced as desired. 6. After recording statements of PW-1 Dr. Kishan Lal Dhanak, PW-2 Dr. Naresh Kadam and PW-3. Anis Ahmad, an application was filed on behalf of accused Uda for getting his age determined through necessary medical examination. Under instructions of the Court a medical board was constituted and that examined accused Uda. As per the finding given by medical board accused Uda was juvenile on the date of incident, thus, his case was remitted to the principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Udaipur for adjudication. 7. Statements of PW-4 Jeeva, PW-5 Megha, PW-6 Goma, PW-7 Dharma Ram, PW-8 Champa Ram, PW-9 Kala Ram, PW-10 Nava, PW-11 Laxman Ram, PW-12 Banshi Lal, PW-13 Bheem Chand, PW-14 Pooran Singh and PW-15 Kala Garasia were then recorded to substantiate the prosecution story. The prosecution also supported its case with the aid of documents Ex. P/1 to Ex. P/25. An opportunity was given to accused Natha to explain the adverse circumstances available in the prosecution evidence. The accused termed the entire prosecution evidence as false and concocted, but he did not choose to produce any evidence in defence. 8. The trial Court after examining the entire record held the appellant guilty for the charges levelled, thus, recorded conviction and awarded sentence accordingly. 9. In appeal, the argument advanced by counsel for the appellant is that as per medical evidence available on record the deceased Singa was having only one incised wound that would have been given by the present appellant but the cause of death is haemorrhagic shock due to multiple injuries and fractures and those are assigned to Uda, thus, the offence of the appellant in no manner travels beyond any offence punishable under Section 326, Indian Penal Code. In alternative, it is also urged that the facts even by accepting the prosecution case are sufficient to establish that the accused was not having any intention to kill Singa and there is no repeated cruel act on his part, therefore, the offence committed by him at the most may cover the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II, Indian Penal Code. 10. 10. Per contra, as per learned Public Prosecutor adequate evidence is available on record about repeated lathi blows given by the accused on the hands and legs of deceased Singa resulting several fractures and other lacerated injuries. As such, the intention of causing death is apparent. 11. Heard counsel for the parties. 12. As per the post-mortem report (Ex. P/10) the person of deceased Singa was having following injuries including the fractures:–– Injuries : 1. Stabbed wound 3.5 cm long right puina blood clots. 2. Abrasion 4 x 1 cm u/s right arm post lateral areas. 3. Bruise 5 x 4 cm left elbow lateral. Reddish blue. 4. Stabbed wound 2 cm long left wrist post. 5. Abrasion 2 x 1 cm left lower elrt lateral areas. 6. Diffuse swelling on left knee joint. 7. Abrasion 2 x 2 cm right chest lateral. 8. Bruise 10 x 5 u/s right arm post lateral, Blue. Fractures : 1. There is a fracture of u/s of shaft and right forearm. 2. There are fractures of u/s of shaft of left reducer and ulna. 3. There are fractures of 1/3 shaft and left reducer and ulna. 4. There are fractures of shaft and right femur. 5. There is fracture of left femur. 6. There is a fracture of lat- .. of left femur. 13. As per the post-mortem report, cause of death is haemorrhagic shock resulted by antemortem multiple fractures of long bones, sufficient to cause death in normal course of life. The contents of the post-moretm report were sufficiently established by the statements given by PW-1 Dr. Kishan Lal Dhanak, PW-2 Dr. Naresh Kadam and PW-3 Dr. Anis Ahmad who were members of the medical board that conducted autopsy on the person of deceased Singa. As per the medical evidence available on record there is no doubt in arriving at the conclusion that the death of Singa was homicidal one. 14. The prosecution cited PW-4 Jeeva as an eye-witness. This eye-witness with all confidence stated that after hearing some hue and cry he rushed to the spot of occurrence where he saw Uda and Natha beating deceased Singa. Natha gave lathi blows on the hands and legs of Singa. 15. PW-5 Megha stated that on getting information about the incident he went to the spot of occurrence where injured Singa was lying down. Natha gave lathi blows on the hands and legs of Singa. 15. PW-5 Megha stated that on getting information about the incident he went to the spot of occurrence where injured Singa was lying down. On asking, Singa stated that Uda and Natha gave him serious blows by lathis. This witness also pointed out that Natha was keeping vengeance with Singa on the count that father of Natha committed a theft of ox. 16. PW-6 Goma also stated when Singa was passing through close to his house, Natha and Uda objected him on way and gave blows with the aid of axe and lathi. This witness also asserted that the accused persons were keeping vengeance with deceased Singa. 17. PW-10 Nava Garasia also supported the prosecution case by stating that on the fateful day he saw Singa in injured condition, his brothers Jeeva and Goma were present at the spot and on asking Singa told that Natha and Uda gave axe and lathi blows to him. 18. PW-14 Pooran Singh, the then Station House Officer, Police Station Bekaria, narrated all the steps taken by the investigating agency during the course of investigation. As per this witness a blood stained axe was recovered under the recovery memo (Ex. P/17) after receiving an information from accused Natha as per provisions of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. 19. The evidence noticed above in addition to recovery of axe at the instance of accused Natha with availability of blood stains of human origin, there is no doubt about involvement of the accused in crime in question. As a matter of fact learned counsel for the appellant too accepted this position and, therefore, confined his argument regarding offence that would have been constituted looking to the facts established. 20. Having considered the entire evidence available on record, we do not find any merit in the argument advanced by counsel for the appellant that the offence committed by accused Natha does not travel beyond an offence punishable under Section 326, Indian Penal Code. True it is, as per the evidence available an axe blow close to ear of deceased Singa was given by the present accused and i.e. not the cause of death, however, PW-4 Jeeva in quite unambiguous terms stated that after giving axe blow Natha gave lathi blows on the hands and legs of deceased Singa. As per "parcha bayan" (Ex. True it is, as per the evidence available an axe blow close to ear of deceased Singa was given by the present accused and i.e. not the cause of death, however, PW-4 Jeeva in quite unambiguous terms stated that after giving axe blow Natha gave lathi blows on the hands and legs of deceased Singa. As per "parcha bayan" (Ex. P/21) and the statements given by other witnesses, Singa too disclosed same fact. No explanation is given by the accused about this adverse circumstance appearing in prosecution evidence. The medical evidence also establishes the fact that deceased Singa was having lacerated wounds and several fractures on his long bones of both hands and legs. 21. The next argument of counsel for the appellant is that the offence as established by the prosecution evidence be accepted, then too that does not travel beyond an offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II, Indian Penal Code, is also not acceptable. The evidence available on record in unambiguous terms establishes that the offender took undue advantage of the circumstances and acted in quite cruel and unusual manner. The several injuries and multiple fractures received by the deceased clearly indicates the cruel attitude of the offender. On examination of the entire evidence the case of the accused appellant does not come in any of the exception clause prescribed under Section 300, Indian Penal Code. The continuous severe blows given to the deceased by the accused with axe and then by lathi are sufficient to establish his intention of killing. In such circumstances, we do not find any wrong with the findings arrived by the trial Court. 22. The appeal, hence is bereft of merit and deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.