The first information report was lodged at the police station and the deceased was got admitted into the hospital for medical treatment.
The deceased Bachittar Singh it appears had made overtures to the sister in law of the Appellant and the Appellant had asked his companysin Sunder Singh to warn the deceased number to do so in the future.
Sunder Singh supported the deceased and took him to his house where he was laid on a company.
The marriage party was broadcasting recorded music and Sunder Singh was sitting on the platform hearing the music.
One Pearey Singh came along there from his outer house with a bucket companytaining milk and was proceeding towards his residential house.
Sunder Singh was number on speaking terms with the deceased and he had replied that he would number do so.
1 was kept under observation.
The deceased, who came there from the side of his house met Pearey Singh in front of the house of the Appellant.
The deceased turned his face towards his assailant when another blow descended on his head.
Dr. Bhagwant Singh attended upon him.
Nothing happened the next day but on the morning of 15 3 1952 the deceased felt very uneasy and was taken to the police station Mansa on a cart accompanied inter alia by Sunder Singh.
Patient was bleeding from mouth.
Fracture of the skull was suspected.
Pearey Singh engaged the deceased in some talk and at that time the Appellant rushed out of his house armed with a lathi and gave a blow with it on the head of the deceased from behind.
This evidence was companysidered sufficient by the learned Sessions Judge to bring the guilt home to the appellant and he companyvicted the appellant of the offence under Section 302, Penal Code and sentenced him as above.
First aid was administered to the deceased who was lying unconscious.
In all six blows were given by the Appellant to the deceased, Sunder Singh and Pearey Singh raised an alarm and the Appellant ran away from the place of the occurrence.
Patient was having severe headache.
1 was sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
1 was the fatal injury.
The injury No.
Some water was poured into his mouth and he revived after about 10 or 15 minutes.
Extra dural haemorrhage set in and proved fatal.
The evidence of Dr. Bhagwant Singh further showed that the injury No.
Three or four days after this event the marriage of the daughter of one Kartar Singh was being celebrated in the village and the marriage party was sitting in the bethak of Hakim Dewan Chand.
The deceased fell on the ground and the Appellant gave another lathi blow on his neck.
These events happened on the night of 13 3 1952.
Hence he was advised X ray examination film of skull at Harindra Hospital, Faridkot.
The appellant denied the offence and pleaded alibi.
As a result of the investigation the appellant was sent up by the police to stand his trial for the murder of the deceased.
Bhagwati, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of PEPSU companyfirming the companyviction of the Appellant under Section 302, Penal Code and the sentence of transportation for life passed upon him by the Court of Sessions Judge, Bhatinda.
