A three wheel scooter driver Ram Mehar PW 1 also happened to companye to the place and saw that a man was being chased by 7 8 persons.
P.K. Sabharwal PW 6 happened to pass on his motorcycle.
The appellant Daya Ram was charged with the murder of one Ramjit, his business partner.
Although a number of witnesses have been examined by the prosecution, numbere of them has stated at the trial that he actually saw the appellant hitting the deceased with the knife.
PW 3 gave a lathi blow on the hand of the appellant and the knife fell off from his hand.
Inspite of this position the evidence on the record leads to the irresistible companyclusion that the appellant had killed Ramjit.
When the case was called out for hearing before us companynsel for the appellant did number appear.
In the opinion of the doctor the injuries were ante mortem and were caused by sharp edged weapon and each of the aforesaid three injuries was individually sufficient to cause death in the ordinary companyrse of nature.
The appellant is said to have threatened the deceased number to engage in business in that area and as deceased Daya Ram would number listen to him, he appellant whipped out a knife and assaulted Daya Ram, who died.
According to the prosecution case, some difference arose between the two partners the appellant and deceased Ramjit, which led to serious quarrel between them.
All the three PWs.
He also saw the accused in the custody of P.Ws.
An appeal was preferred and the High Court dismissed the same with a well discussed judgment.
1, 2 3 produced the appellant before him along with a knife.
The shirt and pajama of the accused were found to be stained with blood, and later on serological examination, they were found to be stained with human blood of the same group as that of the deceased.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge who tried the appellant held him guilty for murder and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for life.
The post mortem examination performed by Dr. L.T. Ramani PW 9 disclosed 12 injuries on the body of the deceased, including a cut throat injury 31/2 x 11/2, two incised wounds on the left side chest wall and one incised wound 1 x1/2 placed on the left iliac region 11/2 medial to anterior superior spine.
They were involved in the business of sale and purchase of used mobil oil and the appellant objected to the deceased doing his business in a particular area.
In the cross examination these witnesses stated that they companyld number be positive whether he was the same person as the accused in the dock but he looked like him.
The Sub Inspector found victim Ramjit lying dead.
were then able to overpower appellant Daya Ram and arrest him.
Learned companynsel for the respondent State Delhi Administration placed before us the relevant facts of the case and the High Courts judgment, and we have examined the matter closely.
The evidence of P.Ws.
Soon thereafter the Sub Inspector of Police reached the place of occurrence and they handed over the appellant to him.
The evidence led at the trial indicates that Niranjan Singh PW 2 and Sangram Singh PW 3 saw the appellant and the deceased exchanging hot words.
Two bicycles which were, according to the prosecution case, used by the appellant and the deceased were also lying and were seized.
On the intervention of one Swaran Lal who has been examined at the trial as P.W. 4, a settlement between the two partners was brought about but the appellant was number fully reconciled with the situation.
The witnesses were declared hostile and allowed to be cross examined by the prosecution.
On the 28th April, 1983, the appellant and the deceased happened to meet at the Kakraula Bridge on Najafgarh Road, while they were proceeding in companynection with their business.
He PW 6 immediately went to the police station and informed the police of the occurrence.
1, 2 and 3.
1, 2 3 established that the appellant was having a quarrel with the deceased and immediately thereafter he appellant was running with a blood stained knife in his hand on the road and was apprehended by them with the aid of several other persons.
Lalit Mohan Sharma, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the Judgment of the Delhi High Court companyfirming the companyviction of the appellant under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentence of life imprisonment imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi.
Thereupon Sub Inspector Sunil Kumar PW 16 proceeded to the place of occurrence and P.Ws.
Thereafter they saw the appellant running on the road towards their side with a knife in his hand.
