Randhir Singh, J.

[1] The appellant in this case has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Lucknow Under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to death.

[2] The case arose out of a murder said to have been committed within the precincts of the city of Lucknow. Ram Lal deceased was an orderly constable of the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Central Range) and used to live in the quarters attached to the residence of the Deputy Inspector General. Some other constables, who were also on the staff of the Deputy Inspector General, resided in the out-houses and one of them was Sundar Singh, who was driver of the staff car. It was alleged on behalf of the prosecution that Sundar Singh appellant, who was a widower, developed intimacy with the young wife of Ram Lal deceased, who also resided with her husband in a kothri close to the kothri or Sunder Singh.

On the night between the 2nd and 3rd February 1954, at about 10 P. M. Ram Lal and Sunder Singh went together on a cycle. Ram Lal was paddling the cycle while Sunder Singh sat behind him on the carrier. At about 1 A. M. Sunder Singh alone returned to the house of the Deputy Inspector General of Police and he was seen by three persons Ram Het, Sadhu Ram and Nabban Khan. Ram Lal did not return with him.

At about 6 A. M. a constable who happened to go out noticed a dead body of a constable lying about a furlong away from the gate of the residence of the Deputy Inspector General of Police. Some people went to see the corpse and it was found that the dead body was that of Ram Lal constable. Intimation was given to the Deputy Inspector General and a first information report was lodged by Ram Het constable at about 7.40 A. M. at the Hazratganj police station.

It was mentioned in this report that Ram Lal and Sunder Singh had gone together on a cycle and at about 1 A. M. Sundar Singh alone returned but Ram Lal did not return. The manner in which the dead body of Ram Lal was discovered is also mentioned in the report. Ram Het constable, who made the first information report, also mentioned in the report that he had suspicion that Sundar Singh had hacked Ram Lal to death.

[3] After the report was lodged, Sub-Inspector Ishtiaq Ahmad came to the place of occurrence and started investigation. He recorded the statements of witnesses and prepared a site plan. The place where the dead body was found as also the residence of the Deputy Inspector General of Police and other adjoining houses are shown in the site plan. Investigation continued and at 3 or 3.30 P. M. the investigating officer chanced to notice a few stains of blood on the shoes worn by the accused. Subsequently his kothri was searched and from a box of which the key was handed over by the appellant a blood-stained patloon and shirt were recovered from the box. The investigating officer was then taken to a culvert from underneath which a blood-stained karauli was taken out by the appellant and given to the Sub-Inspector. A recovery list of all these articles was then prepared and ultimately the appellant was sent up for trial.

[4] The dead body of Ram Lal was sent after an inquest for post mortem examination, which was conducted by the Civil Surgeon. He found as many as 32 incised wounds and stab wounds or various parts of the body of Ram Lal, and death was due in his opinion to shock and haemorrhage from the extensive injuries received by the deceased. The deceased was a young man, about 28 years of age, and was well developed and muscular.

[5] The defence of the appellant was that he did not know anything about the murder. He denied recovery of the blood-stained articles or the making over of the karauli as also the fact that he went out with the deceased at 10 P. M. on the night when the murder was committed.

[6] The learned Additional Sessions Judge believed the story of the prosecution and found the case established satisfactorily against the appellant and sentenced him to death. He has now come up in appeal. Ther