ORDER

M.B. Shah, President - The State Commission held that death of the insured was due to murder and, therefore, the heirs of the insured were not entitled to any benefit under the policy. Hence, allowed the Appeal and dismissed the complaint. On being aggrieved and dissatisfied by judgment and order dated 21.5.2007 passed in Appeal No. 2675/03 by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P., the original complainant has filed this Revision Petition.

2. It is evident from the FIR dated 17.7.1996 that the insured went to the shop of one, Jagdish, for purchasing Bidi. Upon being refused, some altercation between the insured and the shopkeeper took place. On the next day, the brother of the shopkeeper shot the insured at his forehead with his country made revolver, which resulted in the death of the insured. Before the State Commission, the Insurance Company contended that the death of the insured occurred due to murder and, hence, the Insurance Company was not bound to pay the sum assured.

3. Hence, the only question which requires consideration in this Revision Petition is' whether the death caused due to murder of the insured can be held to be accidental death

4. In our view,