physically challenged persons since birth, as of necessity, improvise their own methods of doing things very much in the same manner as a normal person does
It is no doubt true that the appellant is a physically challenged person inasmuchas he suffers from deformity of fingers in both the hands. So far as the arms are concerned, there is no abnormality and, therefore, he is fully capable of using his arms like any other normal person. The fact that he is not capable of holding any object with firm grip with either of his hands does not mean that he cannot hold a knife atleast in his right hand. As noticed by the High Court his right thumb and index finger are sufficiently strong. The evidence on record also proves that he can write with his hand holding a pen. He can also take his meals holding a spoon. Even according to DW.1 he was capable of causing injury No.3 as mentioned in the post-mortem report by assaulting the victim with the knife MO.14. If it is possible for the appellant to do all these things, one fails to understand why he could not have caused injuries 1 & 2 found on the person of the deceased. It is common ex
