Lahiri, J. - This is an appeal against the conviction of the accused u/s. 302 and 324 I. P. C. and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life on the first count and imposing no sentence on the second count, passed by Shri G. C. Phukan,; sessions Judge, Gauhati in Sessions Case No. 11 (K-G) 83. 2. The prosecution case is that the accused was a student aged about 18 years at all relevant time. On 12.7.81 at about 12.30 p.m. he ran amuck in the village, entered the house of P. W. Hari Charan Das, picked up a dao and chased towards persons who could be seen. At that time one Surjya Das a ten years old kid came and the accused dealt dao blow, continued to chase persons and attacked them. Some sustained injuries. Ultimately the villagers overpowered the accused and made him over to police along with the dao. Surya Das died on the spot. A case was registered, the police commenced investigat­ion and on completion thereof, submitted a charge sheet against the accused who in due course was committed to the court of Sessions to stand his trial. As the accused was undefended the court engaged state Defence. The prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses including two doctors and 2 (two) police offi­cers. On behalf of the accused four witnesses were examined including two doctors. P. W. 1, Dr. P. C. Sarmah held the post mortem examination on the dead body of Surjya and proved the injuries in consequence of which Suriya had died. P. W. 2, Dr. Tarun Chandra Das proved the injuries of four persons. All these injuries were cut injuries and inflicted by dao. P. W. 3, Usha Bala Das, P. W. 4, Nami Bala Das, P. W. 5, Hari Charan Das, P. W. 6, Tarun Chandra Das, P. W. 7, Satya Bala Das, P. W. 8, Arun Chandra Das, P. W. 10, Smti. Bagi Bala Das are the witnesses to prove the incident. P. W. 11 and 12 are the police officers. P. W. 6, Tarun, P. W. 7, Satya Bala Das and P. W. 8, Arun Chandra Das were injured and sustained injuries which were proved by P. W. 2, Dr. T. C. Das. The plea taken by the defence was that of insanity. P. W. 11 and 12 are the police officers. P. W. 6, Tarun, P. W. 7, Satya Bala Das and P. W. 8, Arun Chandra Das were injured and sustained injuries which were proved by P. W. 2, Dr. T. C. Das. The plea taken by the defence was that of insanity. The accused, while under examination, stated that he was totally unaware as to what he had done and what he had seen at the relevant time, even could not recollect as to whether he was tied by the villagers at any time and claimed that he was mentally deranged at the time of the occurrence. 3. The sole contention raised before us is that the accused was of unsound mind at the time when he went out, picked up the dao and dealt dao blows, he was incapable of knowing the nature of the acts or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law. Indeed, nothing is an offence which is done by a person of unsound mind under the circumstances set out above. It is a general exception to the rule contained in Chap­ter IV of the Indian Penal Code. To bring a case within the ambit of Sec. 84, it is said the burden is on the prisoner. In­sanity or unsoundness of mind is an exception to the penal law. The fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence is that an accused is presumed to bi innocent and, therefore, the burden lies on the prosecution to prove all the essential ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. In a case of homicide as well as offence of causing hurt or grievous hurt the prosecution put prove beyond reasonable doubt the requisite intention or knowledge ingrained in Sees. 299, 326 and 324 of the Indian Ptenas8 Code. The burden never shifts and it always rests on the prosecution. Sec. 84, I.P.C. provides an exception to the general rule contained in the Penal Code where the plea of the accused is unsoundness of mind, which incapacitated his faculties to know the nature of his acts or what he was doing was either wrong or contrary to law. The burden never shifts and it always rests on the prosecution. Sec. 84, I.P.C. provides an exception to the general rule contained in the Penal Code where the plea of the accused is unsoundness of mind, which incapacitated his faculties to know the nature of his acts or what he was doing was either wrong or contrary to law. This being an exception attracts Sec. JOS of the evidence Act, which lays down that the burden of proving the existence of the circumstances bringing the case wi­thin the said exception lies on the accused, as the court is to presume and continue to presume the absence of the exceptional circumstances. However, Sec. 105 of the Evidence Act must be read along with the definition of the expressions "shall presume" in See. 4 of the Evidence Act and the combined reading of both the Section bring in fore that the court shall regard the ab­sence of the exceptional circumstances as proved, unless after considering the matters before it, the court believes that the said circumstances existed or their existence was so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the case, would act upon the supposition that they did exist. The presumption, that such circumstances did exist must be put forward by the accused. The material must be sufficient at least to make a reasonable person to believe the existence of the said circumstances probable and to act upon them. The materials may be oral evidence, documentary evidence, presumptions, admissions or may stem from the prosecution evidence. The accused is to raise a reasonable doubt in the mind of the Judge to ponder as to whe­ther the accused had the requisite criminal intention described in See. 299 and/or other provisions of "the Code". If the Judge has a reasonable doubt he has to acquit the accused for in that event the prosecution will have failed to prove conclusi­vely the guilt of the accused. 299 and/or other provisions of "the Code". If the Judge has a reasonable doubt he has to acquit the accused for in that event the prosecution will have failed to prove conclusi­vely the guilt of the accused. We are of the view that the ru­les of burden of proof in the context of the plea of insanity are : - (a) that the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the offence was committed by the accused with the requisite 'mens rea' and the burden continues from the beginning till the end of the trial, (b) that it is a rebut table presumption that the prisoner was not insane when he committed an offence in the sense set forth in Section 841. P. C., (c) that the accused may rebut the presumption of sanity at the relevant time brin­ging the case within Section 841. P. C. by producing oral documentary, circumstantial and other materials and he may disch­arge the burden by establishing a reasonably probable case. The acc­used is not called upon to establish the element of Sec. 84 I.P.C. by producing evidence beyond reasonable doubt; and (iv) that even the-accused fails to establish affirmatively or conclusively that he was of unsound mind and committed the act under the circums­tances set out in Section 84 I.P.C. bat raises a reasonable doubt in the mind of the court as regards presence of the essential ingre­dients of the offence, which of course includes "mens rea” the requisite criminal intention, the court would be entitled to acquit the accused on the ground that the general burden of proof resting on the prosecution was not discharged. We are also of the view that Section 6 of the Indian Penal Code is an extra-ordinary provision, which obligates the court to consider whether a case is covered by any of the exceptions under Chapter IV of the Indian Penal Code. Section 6, I.P.C., in our opinion, should be read as a proviso to Sec. 105, Indian Evidence Act. That apart, sec­tion 6 of the Code imposes a statutory obligation on the court to consider as to whether a case is covered by exception or not. The view that we have expressed is drawn from the decisions of the Supreme Court in Dayabhai Chhaganbhai vs. State of Gujarat, AIR 1964 SC 1553: Ratanlal vs. State of M.P., AIR 1971 SC 778 : 1971 Crl. The view that we have expressed is drawn from the decisions of the Supreme Court in Dayabhai Chhaganbhai vs. State of Gujarat, AIR 1964 SC 1553: Ratanlal vs. State of M.P., AIR 1971 SC 778 : 1971 Crl. L.J. 654; Abdul Latif vs. State of Assam, 1981 Crl. L.7. 7205; and Kumar Sunilal Deb vs. State of Assam, (1981) 1 GLR 120. 4. The sole point which has been urged before us is that the accused was of unsound mind at the relevant time and OB that count he, at the time of doing the acts, was incapable of knowing the nature of the acts or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law. The witnesses for the prosec­ution pictured the query conduct of the accused. He was a young boy and had no grudge, ill will or animosity against the diseased or the injured persons. He suddenly started running, followed by his mother and sister and dived into the water and ran into the house of Hari Charan Das and picked up a load. First, Shri Surjya Das, the deceased, came in his view and the accused dealt a blow on his neck. There was no enmity or ill will of the accused against Surjya. It was a motiveless as atilt. This part of the story has been narrated by P. Ws. 3. Usaa Bala, P. W. 4, Nani Bila Das, P. W. 5, Hari Charan Das and P. W. 6, Tarun Chandra Das. P. W. 6, Tarun Ch. Das was also injured when he appeared before the accused. P. W. 6 stated in clear terms that the accused had no enmity with any of the assaulted persons. P. W. 7, Sabya Bala Das also supports the story that while she was starching clothes in the Court-yard the accused came and assaulted her without any rhyme or reason. She sustained injuries. P. W. 8, Arun Chandra Das says that on seeing the accused out of fear he jumped into water, but the accused followed him and dealt dao blows. P. W. 9, Aghanu Gaonburah is a formal witness, who lodged the ejahar and was present at the time of the inquest and the preparation of the seizure lists. P. W. 10, Smti. Bagi Bala Das, mother of the deceased Surjya, stated that her son was aged about 10 years. P. W. 9, Aghanu Gaonburah is a formal witness, who lodged the ejahar and was present at the time of the inquest and the preparation of the seizure lists. P. W. 10, Smti. Bagi Bala Das, mother of the deceased Surjya, stated that her son was aged about 10 years. She also could not say why the child was killed by the accused. P. W. 12, Dwijesh Kalita, S.I. of Police, investigated the case. On receipt of the ejahar he went to the place, held inquest, prepared a sketch map and seized material exhibits like dao etc. He submitted the charge sheet upon examination of the witnesses. He has stated that on reaching the place of occurrence when he was investigating the case to find out the motive behind the murder and the assaults, the leading witnesses to the occurrence told him that the accused "had been under the spell of Nymph" and that even Poojas were offered to remove the spell. The people also told him that the accused had been suffering from illness because of the influence of a Nymph and to remove the spell Pooja was performed on the date of the occurrence. Even the father of the accused immediately told him that the accused was ill and the people told him to offer Poojas to cure the illness of the accused. The fact regarding the spell of Nymph, offering of Poojas on the date of occurrence to remove the spell of the accused was told to the Investigating Officer by P. W. 3, Usha Bala Das. P. W. 5, Had Charan Das, P. W. 7, Sabya Bala Das. We find from the record that on the basis of the reports submitted by the Investigating Police officer, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup at Gauhati recorded that the accused was 'abnormal' and that he should be examined by the District Health Officer and the report of the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Kamrup at Gauhati was that the accused was mentally unba­lanced. The report was submitted on the basis of observations and investigation made by the Medical Officer. 5. ID sum, we find from the prosecution evidence that the behaviour and conduct of the accused at all relevant time were queer, strange and abnormal. The report was submitted on the basis of observations and investigation made by the Medical Officer. 5. ID sum, we find from the prosecution evidence that the behaviour and conduct of the accused at all relevant time were queer, strange and abnormal. We also find that the police offi­cer, who was investigating the case gathered that the accused was ill, which was taken by the villagers as the case of spell cast by a spirit and on the date of the occurrence Poojas were offered to remove the spell. The next aspect is that the Chief Judicial Magis­trate also found the accused 'abnormal'. After due medical exa­mination the Chief Medical Officer submitted a report that the accused was mentally unbalanced. However, during the course of trial P. Ws. 3, 5 and 7 denied that they had made such statements regarding unsoundness of mind of the accused at the relevant time. But their statements stand contradicted by the police statements proved in this case, vide page 39 of the paper book. The defence adduced evidence to establish that the case falls u/s. 84 I. P. C. D. W. 1. Gauri Kanta Thakuria is a village quack. He claims that be did 'medical treatment by meditation' in the village and one day before the occurrence the mother of the accused brought the accused to him, but the accused started abusing in obscene languages and he took the accused as "almost insane''. The witness claimed that he was a tribal priest and treated persons suffering from evil affects of spells cast by spirit or ghost. He is also a palmist. The wit­ness admitted that he never treated any insane person and said that he was consulted to make the prophecy whether the accused would recover from his illness or not. From the evidence of the witness it appears that the accused was ill for some time and he noticed signs of insanity. We propose not to give much reliance on his testimony to reach the conclusion that the ace used was of unsound mind. However, similar things do happen in villages. D.W. 2, Birohi Das, mother of the accused, stated that after killing a cobra the accused started talking incohe­rently. He was morose, fearful and was always afraid that something evil would be fall. D.W. 3, Dr. However, similar things do happen in villages. D.W. 2, Birohi Das, mother of the accused, stated that after killing a cobra the accused started talking incohe­rently. He was morose, fearful and was always afraid that something evil would be fall. D.W. 3, Dr. R. Chakra borty is the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Kamrup, who examined the accused on 22.1.82, as required by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gauhati and found the accused mentally imbalanced. He said that earlier on 12.1.81, he also examined the accused and found that he was mentally unbalanced. D.W. 4, Dr. Dasarath Choudhury is the Medical Officer of the Gauhati District Jail. He voluntarily observed the accused in jail and he found that the accused did not behave normally. 6. The sum and substance of the entire evidence of the prosecution as well as defence witnesses boils down to this that immediately after the occurrence the investigating agency was informed that the accused had been under the spell of Nymph or spirit arid was suffering from illness. We find (hat the po­lice officer also heard the story during the investigation of the case. We further find that the Chief Judicial Magistrate before whom the accused was produced found "abnormality" and asked the Medical Officer in-charge of the District Jail to examine the accused. The Medical Officer in charge of the jail also found abnormal behaviour of the accused while he was in jail. Fur­ther we find that when the Chief Judicial Magistrate desired to have a medical report about the sanity of the accused the Chief Medical Officer submitted that the accused was "abnormal”. The plea of the accused in court is that he was suffering from some mental disorder and could not say what he did and what he saw, at all relevant time. He said that he could not re­collect anything about the incident because he was mentally deranged. 7. The accused is poor and comes from a village. We cannot expect the poor parents to take the boy to the psychia­trist or a specialist. It is too costly for them. The accused was poor and undefended. He said that he could not re­collect anything about the incident because he was mentally deranged. 7. The accused is poor and comes from a village. We cannot expect the poor parents to take the boy to the psychia­trist or a specialist. It is too costly for them. The accused was poor and undefended. From the conduct and behaviour of the accused at all the relevant time, the fact that there was no rhyme or reason for the accused to behave in the manner on the date of occurrence, the statement of the investigating Officer as to what he gathered about the mental condition of the accused at the relevant him, the Shading of the Chief judicial Magistrate and the testimony of the defence witnesses and in particular those of the Medical officers, we have no hesitation in reaching the con­clusion that the accused was, at all relevant time, mentally unsound and at the time of doing the acts he was incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that what he did was either wrong or contrary to law. The fact that a person was suffering from unsoundness of mind can be established by preponderance of probability on the basis of relevant features gleaning from the conduct of the accused, the surrounding facts and circumstances of the case, and also by direct evidence. The accused has rebutted the presumption mentioned in Sec. 105 of the Indian Evidence Act by placing sufficient materials before the court on the basis of oral, documentary evidence, pre­sumptions, admission and the prosecution evidence. The materials placed before us establish or raise a reasonable doubt in our mind that the accused had not the requisite criminal intention at the relevant time and as such, the case squarely falls u/s. 84 I. P. C. We hold that in the instant case by preponderance of probability it has been established that the accused was men­tally unsound and at the time of the commission of the acts he was incapable of knowing the nature of acts and/or that what he was doing was either wrong or contrary to law, and accordingly we set aside conviction and sentence passed against the appellant. However, we direct that the appellant may not be released until the requisite conditions of law are fulfilled. 8. However, we direct that the appellant may not be released until the requisite conditions of law are fulfilled. 8. We have acquitted the accused on the ground that at the time at which he was alleged to have committed the offe­nce, he was, by reason of unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing the nature of the acts alleged as constituting the offe­nces and/or that they were wrong or contrary to law, but we rec­ord the finding that it was the accused who committed the acts. Now, it would be the statutory obligation of the learned Sess­ions Judge to follow meticulously the provisions of Section 535 of Cr. P. C. Learned Judge may direct detention of the accused in safe custody in such manner as he thinks fit or may order the accused to be delivered to any relative or friend of the accused on such terms and conditions as be thinks just and prudent. The accused may be detained in the lunatic asylum, however, in accordance with the provisions of the Rules framed under the Indian Lunacy Act, 1912. We direct the learned Sess­ions Judge to follow the provisions of Section 338 of 'the Code' carefully and cautiously to protect the interest of the society. The accused shall not be released from the safe custody until the concerned Civil Surgeon or the Chief Medical Officer or the Commission certifies that the appellant is fit to live in the so­ciety and could no longer be a hazard to the society. Learned Sessions Judge shall report to the State Government the action taken by him u/s. 335 (1) of 'the Code'. We draw the attention of learned Sessions Judge and the authorities to the mandatory provisions contained in Sec. 338 of "the Code". 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent indi­cated above.