36.As already discussed hereinabove, it has been categorically
testified by almost all the eye witnesses supported by the evidence
of P.W.14 - Dr. Arun Koli that there were three stab wounds on the
person of deceased Akbar which necessarily meant to be that the
appellant had full knowledge and intention that due to his act,
Akbar would die or otherwise, he would have inflicted a single
blow, not on his vital part, but somewhere else. It is further evident
that he did not simply stab in the stomach of Akbar but twisted the
knife and then pulled it back which demonstrates his clear
intention and mens rea in committing the murder of deceased
Akbar. Though, initially, it might, at the first blush, appeared that
he intended to cause death of P.W.12 - Rehana but, instead he
thrusted the knife into the stomach of Akbar with force and
twisted the same. He did not stop there but further stabbed
deceased Akbar in the chest and hand. What more is required to
understand the intention of the appellant? Act of the appellant
would not, therefore, be covered by section 304 of the Indian
Penal Code, but it would definitely be covered within clause (ii) of
section 300 of the Indian Penal Code which contemplates that
culpable homicide is a murder if it is done with the intention of
causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to
cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused. No
sane man would accept and believe that instead of causing death
of P.W.12 - Rehana, the knife blows accidentally fell upon the
person of deceased Akbar. It is significant to note that there was
not a single stab wound but consecutively three stab wounds
inflicted on the vital part of the body of deceased Akbar namely
stomach, chest and arm. It cannot be said to be a case covered
