He was found in a sitting posture bleeding profusely.
The evidence of P.W. 12 is companyroborated by the evidence of PW 1.
A dispute arose between the appellant P.W. 12 regarding the sharing of the remuneration due to them from P.W. 13.
The appellant and one Gian Singh, P.W. 12, were working as carpenters in partnership for more than two years with different timber merchants in Delhi.
P.W. 12 companyveyed this threat of the accused to PW 1, the brother of Santokh Singh.
The matter was referred to the arbitration of the deceased, he made an award regarding the wages payable to the appellant and P.W. 12 by P.W. 13.
As special leave has been restricted only to the question of sentence, we fill only refer to the facts bearing on the same.
The postmortem certificate issued by the Doctor P.W. 21, shows that as many as sixteen injuries were found on the dead body of the deceased.
The appellant appears to have been dis satisfied with the award made by the deceased.
made the payment according to the award on April 16, 1970.
P.W. 1 companyveyed the same to his brother, Santokh Singh, but the latter did number pay any serious attention to this threat.
According to the Doctor, injuries Nos.
The appellant was arrested on April 19, 1970, in his village.
Though the appellant had given a companyfessional statement to the Magistrate, he retracted the same and pleaded alibi in the Sessions Court.
1 to 3 singly and all other injuries companylectively companyld have caused death in the ordinary companyrse of nature.
P.W. 13.
Vaidialingam, J. The only question that arises for companysideration in this appeal by special leave is whether the award of sentence of death is justified.
They worked for some time under Santokh Singh, the deceased, before they went over to work under P.W. 13.
The number of injuries found on the body of the deceased shows that the appellant had inflicted as many as sixteen injuries on an unarmed and defenceless person.
According to the prosecution, on April 18, 1970, at about 3.45 P.M., when Santokh Singh was in his timber depot, the accused went to his shop and stabbed him in discriminately as a result of which Santokh Singh sustained serious injuries and died.
On April 17, 1970, at about 4.10 P.M. he mentioned to P.W. 12 that if Santokh Singh does number pay the amounts due to him, he, the accused, will murder him.
The deceased was unarmed at that time and the position in which he was found by the witnesses, immediately after the occurrence, clearly shows that he companyld number at all have been the aggressor.
The High Court has agreed with this reasoning of the trial Court.
