The gun was relevant to the offenses charged and sufficient evidence was presented to support the conclusion that the gun was the one used by the defendant. State v. Battle, 4 N.C. App. 588, 167 S.E.2d 476 (1969). Defendant's appeal fails to disclose prejudicial error.

But, where there is no evidence that defendant was in apprehension, real or apparent, that the decedent was going to kill him or do him serious bodily harm, the court is not required to charge on the law of self-defense. State v. Rawley, 237 N.C. 233, 74 S.E.2d 620 (1953); State v. Battle, 4 N.C. App. 588, 167 S.E.2d 476 (1969). While there was testimony by defendant and his wife in the case at hand that Whittson threatened to cut defendant, and that he had a knife in his hand after he was shot, there was no evidence that defendant had any apprehension that Whittson would kill him or do him serious bodily harm. At no time in his testimony did defendant state that he was afraid of Whittson or that he got his gun to protect himself from Whittson.

Nevertheless, the better practice requires that the court, upon request, instruct the jury at the time the evidence is admitted, if timely request is made. See State v. Bryant, 282 N.C. 92, 191 S.E.2d 745 (1972), cert. denied 410 U.S. 958 and 410 U.S. 987; State v. Paige, 272 N.C. 417, 158 S.E.2d 522 (1968); State v. Hardee, 6 N.C. App. 147, 169 S.E.2d 533 (1969); State v. Battle, 4 N.C. App. 588, 167 S.E.2d 476 (1969), cert. denied 275 N.C. 500 (1969); 1 Stansbury, N.C. Evidence, 52 (Brandis Rev. 1973). New trial.