(1.) The appellant was convicted by the Sessions Court, Monghyr under Section 302, I.P.C. for committing the murder of one Ramswarath Singh. His conviction has been upheld by the Patna High Court.
(2.) It is not necessary to refer to the prosecution case or to the evidence led by the prosecution to prove its case, as the learned Counsel for the appellant has confined his submission to the nature of offence which can be said to have been committed by the appellant. The evidence on record discloses that accused Ram Prakash Singh and deceased Ramswarath Singh were friends. As a result of some misunderstanding between them their relations had become strained. Deceased Ramswarath Singh used to tell others that Ram Prakash Singh owed some money to him and was not paying the same. On the day of the incident, that is on 29-6-1976, accused Ram Prakash Singh met Ramswarath Singh near the Choraha of Mauza, Tilak Nagar. Ram Prakash Singh enquired from Ramswarath Singh as to why he is unnecessarily maligning him. That led to a hot exchange of words between them. During this altercation Ram Prakash Singh took out a knife and gave one blow to Ramswarath Singh.
(3.) What is contended by the learned Counsel is that accused Ram Prakash and deceased Ramswarath had met accidentally and in a sudden quarrel which had taken place between them, both the deceased and the accused had become very angry and during the altercation that followed, in the heat of passion, accused Ram Prakash had given one knife blow. He had not tried to give a second blow even though Ramswarath had not fallen down. He further submitted that the doctor, who was examined in this case, has also not stated that the injury which was caused was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. He, therefore, submitted that the conviction of the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. is not proper and illegal.