A. K. PADHI, J. ( 1 ) APPELLANT faced his trial under Sections 302, 323 and 332, Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as 'the Code') for committing murder of his wife and two minor children, for assaulting the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police while on duty and one Raghu Pradhan (P. W. 1 ). Additional Sessions Judge has convicted him under Sections 302, 332 and 323 of the Code and has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the Code and Rigorous Imprisonment for three month and one month under Sections 332 and 323 of the Code, respectively, directing all the sentences to run concurrently, the present appeal has been filed challenging the same. ( 2 ) PROSECUTION case in brief, is that the accused was working as a labourer and was residing with his wife-Sambari (deceased), son-Dambaru (deceased), daughter-Mini (deceased) and another small daughter at village Subalpur under Pipili Police Station in the district of Puri. P. W. 1 (Raghunath Padhan) is a distant relation of the accused and his house is situated close by. In the midnight 16/17-7-1986, hearing groaning sound from the house of the accused, P. W. 1 went there. When he reached near the house of the accused, he heard Mini (deceased minor daughter of the accused) shouting from inside that her father was assaulting her, P. W. 1 asked her to come out by opening the door. When Mini was trying to open the door, P. W. 1 heard a sound of assault and then a groaning sound from inside. When Raghu questioned him as to why he was assaulting his daughter, the accused rushed and assaulted him by means of a crow bar as a result of which he fell down senseless. Subsequently, being informed regarding the incident by P. W. 2 (father of P. W. 1), A. S. I. Bharat Pradhan of Satasankha out post rushed to the spot along with some constables and found the accused moving restlessly in a violent mood inside the house with a crow bar in his hand. When attempt was made by the A. S. I. to apprehend the accused, he ran towards him and also attempted to assault him by the crow bar. The A. S. I. over powered him and tied him by a rope and took him to custody. The A. S. I. suffered minor injuries during the tussle. When attempt was made by the A. S. I. to apprehend the accused, he ran towards him and also attempted to assault him by the crow bar. The A. S. I. over powered him and tied him by a rope and took him to custody. The A. S. I. suffered minor injuries during the tussle. Entering inside, he found that wife of the accused, his minor son named Dambaru and his minor daughter named Mini were lying dead inside the house. Raghu Pradhan (P. W. 1) was lying injured outside. ( 3 ) PLEA of the accused was that of a total denial. ( 4 ) ACTUAL commission of the murder of the three deceased persons has not been witnessed by any one. There is, however, circumstantial evidence which clearly indicates that the accused, the three deceased persons and another small minor daughter were the sole occupants of the house at the time when groaning sound of the deceased daughter and sound of assaults had been heard from inside the house of the accused by P. W. 1. Further, P. W. 2 heard P. W. 1 shouting from the house of the accused that he was being assaulted by the accused. When the A. S. I. came to the spot with some constables, he found the accused in violent mood inside the house where the dead bodies were lying. Relying on above evidence and considering the facts and circumstances, learned trial Judge has held that accused was the author of the crime and the death of deceased persons were homicidal. Learned Additional Sessions Judge further found that P. W. 1 and the A. S. I. were assaulted during the occurrence. It is not disputed at the bar that the death of the deceased persons were homicidal and P. W. s. 1 and 16 received injuries during the occurrence. After considering all the evidence on record, we find that findings of the learned trial Judge are well founded and cannot be assailed. It is not disputed at the bar that the death of the deceased persons were homicidal and P. W. s. 1 and 16 received injuries during the occurrence. After considering all the evidence on record, we find that findings of the learned trial Judge are well founded and cannot be assailed. ( 5 ) AT the trial, a plea of insanity was raised and it was contended that from the evidence on record it was clear that the appellant was mentally deranged for some time in the past, was insane at the time of occurrence and continued to be deranged after the incident and the acts of the appellant, on the date of occurrence would come within the purview of Section 84 of the Code. The plea of insanity was negatived by the learned trial Judge on the ground that the appellant had failed to prove that he was insane at the time when he killed his wife and children and assaulted P. W. 1 and P. W. 16. ( 6 ) MR. Tapan Mohanty, appearing for the appellant invited our attention to the relevant portions of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and contended that from the evidence on record it is apparent that the appellant was insane at the time of commission of the acts which resulted in the death of his wife and two children and, therefore, his acts come under exception i. e. Section 84 of the Code. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that though the appellant might have behaved in an insane manner before and after commission of the offence, from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses who were with the appellant at the proximity of time of the commission of the acts, insanity of the appellant at the time of occurrence has not been proved. ( 7 ) IN order to get the protection of Section 84 of the Code, it is to be proved that at the point of time of commission of the offence, the appellant was insane to the extent that he was incapable of knowing the nature of the act he was committing. Ordinarily, a person is responsible for the act committed by him. There are, however, some exceptions to this general rule. One of the exceptions is Section 84 of the Code. Ordinarily, a person is responsible for the act committed by him. There are, however, some exceptions to this general rule. One of the exceptions is Section 84 of the Code. When it is established that the accused who committed the crime - (i) Was of unsound mind at the time of commission of the crime; and (ii) As a result thereof, he was incapable of understanding the nature of the act he committed or that he was doing a wrongful act, he is entitled to the protection under Section 84 of the Code. 7a. Exception in Section 84 of the Code in based on the principle that in order to constitute 'crime', the act should have been committed with 'guilty' intention, and if the doer of the act not knowing the nature of the act of the wrongfulness of the act of the illegality of the act committed the same, he cannot be held responsible for it. It is very pertinent that it has to be proved that unsoundness of mind was so such an extent at the time of commission of the offence that the doer of the act could not know the nature of the act he was, committing. According to Section 84 of the Code, nothing is an offence, which is done by a person who at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law. ( 8 ) WHILE analysing the scope and ambit of Section 84 of the Code in the oft-quoted decision Dehyabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1964 SC 1563 : (1964 (2) Cri LJ 472), K. Subba Rao, J. speaking for the Court observed (Para 9) :"when a plea of legal insanity is set up, the Court has to consider whether at the time of commission of the offence the accused, by reason of unsoundness of mind, was incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law. The crucial point of time for ascertaining the state of mind of the accused is the time when the offence was committed. The crucial point of time for ascertaining the state of mind of the accused is the time when the offence was committed. Whether the accused was in such a state of mind as to be entitled to the benefit of S. 84 of the Indian Penal Code can only be established from the circumstances which preceded, attended and followed the crime. " ( 9 ) THE same principles have been reiterated and followed by the apex court in AIR 1966 SC 1 : (1966 Cri LJ 63), (Bhikari v. The State of Uttar Pradesh), AIR 1971 SC 778 : (1971 Cri LJ 654), (Ratan Lal v. The State of Madhya Pradesh) and AIR 1974 SC 216 : (1974 Cri LJ 305) (Oyami Ayatu v. The State of Madhya Pradesh ). ( 10 ) HOWEVER, in AIR 1977 SC 608 : (1977 Cri LJ 376), (Amrit Bhushan Gupta v. Union of India) and 1981 SC (Cri) 516 (Paras Ram v. State of Punjab), it has been held that unless the court comes to the conclusion that the accused was insane at the point of time he committed the offence he cannot be absolved of the responsibility of the offence even if it is found by the court that he was insane either earlier or in the later point of time of the commission of offence. In a decision of the Division Bench reported in (1985) 2 Orissa LR 398 (Butu @ Madhu Oram v. State) one of us (S. C. Mohapatra, J.), speaking for the Court has expressed that accused is not to be called upon to prove the ingredients of Section 84, IPC beyond reasonable doubt in order to get an acquittal, though the burden lies on the accused to prove his insanity at the time of occurrence and it will be sufficient if the materials on record lead to an inference that the requirements of Section 84, I. P. C. may be reasonably probable. Such an inference can be drawn from materials on record, past history of the accused, conduct of the accused during the occurrence and thereafter. Absence of motive though "sine qua non," is a relevant factor for consideration. Such an inference can be drawn from materials on record, past history of the accused, conduct of the accused during the occurrence and thereafter. Absence of motive though "sine qua non," is a relevant factor for consideration. ( 11 ) IN Shama Tudu v. State, (1986) 1 Orissa LR 536 : (1987 Cri LJ 618), Behera, J. speaking for the Court observed that it is not every person suffering from mental disease who can avoid responsibility for a crime by invoking the plea of insanity. While explaining what is a legal insanity his Lordship opined that a person whose cognitive faculties are so impaired as to make it impossible for him to know the nature of his act or that what he was doing was wrong or contrary to law, is exempted from criminal responsibility and come within the purview of "legal insanity". According to us the circumstances from which inference can be drawn regarding mental condition of the accused at the time of commission of the act are- (A) motive; (b) deliberation and preparation; (c) desire for concealment; (d) conduct after commission of the crime showing consciousness of guilt and effort to avoid detection; (e) offer of excuse of making statements which are false; and (f) conduct before, at the time and after the commission of offence. Keeping in mind the aforesaid principle; the plea of insanity is to be judged. ( 12 ) SOME of the prosecution witnesses had deposed as follows :-p. W. 2, a cousin of the accused has stated :-". . . . . . I have seen the accused on the day preceding the occurrence. I found him talking in mischievous manner when I (illegible) engaged him in conversation with me (Chagala Katha Hauthse ). He was not behaving in a normal way. By 'chagala' I mean 'pagla'. Occasionally he used to behave in a strange manner and he used to remain away from his house for days together. Whenever he felt like it, he used to stop working and return home from the place of his work. ""about a year prior to the occurrence the accused beat some people during a Jatra at Satasankha without any reason. He was apprehended by the Police and taken to the police station. Some medicines purchased from the shop of Udia Baral were administered to him and he became alright. ""about a year prior to the occurrence the accused beat some people during a Jatra at Satasankha without any reason. He was apprehended by the Police and taken to the police station. Some medicines purchased from the shop of Udia Baral were administered to him and he became alright. Even subsequently also the accused used to purchase medicine from the shop of Udia Baral. As the accused started abusing people in the village without any cause about a week prior to the occurrence, we brought some medicines from Udia Baral and gave the medicines to him (Again says ). The accused went to the shop of Udia Baral where he was given some medicines. Prior to the occurrence many a time he acted in an abnormal way in the village (Munda Kharap Hoi Jai Thae ). "p. Ws. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 11 are the co-villager of the accused. Relevant portions of their evidence are narrated for appreciation. P. W. 3 :". . . . . He was holding the crow bar with his raised hands, and his house was full of blood. Sometime after, the police came on the scene on being called by P. W. 2 and with great difficulty they could apprehend the accused who was behaving in a violent manner. xx xx xx he used to behave in an abnormal manner occasionally prior to the occurrence. About a week before the occurrence he had beaten some people in the village. Medicines were brought from the shop of Udia Baral and given to him. As he becomes abnormal in mind he used to behave in a strange manner. (Musda Kharap, Hoi Jai thae ). "p. W. 4 :"the houses in our street lies separate from each other. Once in a month or a fortnight the accused's mind gets off balance (Munda Kharap Hoi Jai) and when that happens he used to wander aimlessly "and remain away from home for a long time. He used to leave his house without informing his wife and children and they used to go in search of him. I never went to his house during the periods he lost the mental balance. "p. W. 5 :"when he came out of the house with his crow-bar raised and rushed towards the A. S. I. to beat him we all left the place in fear. I never went to his house during the periods he lost the mental balance. "p. W. 5 :"when he came out of the house with his crow-bar raised and rushed towards the A. S. I. to beat him we all left the place in fear. When he dealt a blow on the A. S. I. the A. S. I. with the assistance of others held him. "p. W. 6 :"i saw the accused moving from one end of the room to the other restlessly two or three times. xx xx xx occasionally the mind of the accused gets affected (Munda Kharap Hoijaye) during that time he wanders aimlessly. "p. W. 7 :"after a little while the accused came running out of the house with his crowbar raised. When the A. S. I. tried to stop him he gave a hit on the A. S. I. with the crow-bar. The crow-bar first came in contact with the eves (sic) of the house before hitting the A. S. I. Then the A. S. I. and others physically overpowered the accused and held him by tying his hands and legs. "p. W. 8 :"about an year prior to the occurrence the accused was behaving like a mad man (Pagala) for some time and during that period he assaulted some people near a Macha Jatra at Satasankha. I only heard about the incident and was not present myself. "i saw the accused two days prior to the occurrence and I did not mark any abnormality in him. " p. W. 9 :"about an year prior to the occurrence the accused had taken a bullock from a dealer at Satasankha Melan promising to purchase it and () (sic) the same in front of his house. The same day after some time he bit the ear of the bullock. Again says :- He bit the ear of the of the bullock dealer, who belonged to the south and who had come to take back bullock. The accused used to behave in that strange fashion once in a month or fortnight (Tanka Murda Kharap Haijaya ). Without any cause or reason he would sometimes start abusing people or attempt to beat them. He also used to leave his work half way without informing anyone. The accused used to behave in that strange fashion once in a month or fortnight (Tanka Murda Kharap Haijaya ). Without any cause or reason he would sometimes start abusing people or attempt to beat them. He also used to leave his work half way without informing anyone. "p. W. 11 : Cross-examination by the State Defence Counsel :-"we had all gone to see a Hindi film, the title which I do not remember now. I had not gone to any film with the accused at any time before. We purchased our respective tickets, for the film. We returned home from the Cinema Hall within 10 to 15 minutes after the show was over at 11 p. m. During the show the accused did not go out of the cinema hall. I did not mark if any other person of our village had come to the Cinema. We did not have refreshments on our way back home from the Cinema. I do not remember as to what was the theme of the cinema. By the time I went to the spot next morning it was 7 or 8 a. m. By then the preparation of documents on which my signature was taken was already over (Again says) the documents were prepared after I went there. P. W. 12 is the brother-in-law (brother of the deceased wife of the accused ). According to him, the deceased and her husband were pulling on well. He has deposed. "about 9 months back the police at Satasankha Out Post sent for me to village Subalpur. I was informed that the accused became mad and killed his wife, daughter and son. Once in two or three years the mind of the accused used to become abnormal (Munda Kharap Houthee ). Therefore, when I heard that the accused had gone mad and killed his wife and children, I believed it. The people assembled near the house of the accused were also saying that since the accused became mad he killed his wife and children. The accused, some times used to run away from his house and people used to run behind and bring back. My mother used to go with the accused occasionally to Satasankha to bring medicines for him. They also came to Puri for medicines on some occasions. The accused, some times used to run away from his house and people used to run behind and bring back. My mother used to go with the accused occasionally to Satasankha to bring medicines for him. They also came to Puri for medicines on some occasions. I used to hear from my sister Sambari that the accused occasionally used to loose his mental imbalance (Munda Kharap Hauthee) once in a year or two. "p. W. 16 is the Assistant Police Sub-Inspector, who had gone immediately to the spot after getting information regarding the murders. His evidence is to the following effect :"i was standing close to his door way when the accused came out and rushed towards me. Seeing him I retreated from the place some distance. The accused dealt two blows with his crowbar which struck my hands. I sustained injuries on both my hands. xx xx xx it is not a fact that I stated before the I. O. that at that time the accused was completely naked. "p. W. 17, an independent witness has stated that the A. S. I. was stating that the accused had become insane. P. W. 19 is the doctor who examined the accused and also sent requisition after few hours of the occurrence i. e. at 7. 00 a. m. of 17-7-1986. His evidence is as follows :-"as I marked symptoms of insanity in Raghu Pradhan S/o. Sirim Padhan I referred him to the Headquarters Hospital, Puri for investigation and treatment, if necessary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I found the person incoherent in talk and also irritable. I also found some minor bruises all over his body. I have admitted him in the Sakhigopal Hospital for his illness and later I referred him to Puri Headquarters Hospital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "p. W. 20 is the I. O. who conducted the investigation has deposed as follows :-"despite repeated questioning the accused was not giving any answers and he appeared to be restless. I, therefore, sent him also for medical examination to the Medical Officer at Sakhigopal Hospital. Ext. A/1 is the requisition issued by me. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I, therefore, sent him also for medical examination to the Medical Officer at Sakhigopal Hospital. Ext. A/1 is the requisition issued by me. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . After I sent the accused for medical examination to the Sakhigopal Hospital, he was observed for some time by the doctor there who then referred him to District Headquarters Hospital, Puri. The accused was brought to Puri Hospital on 18-7-1986 and he was kept in the Hospital. On 19-7-86 he was referred to S. C. B. Medical College, Cuttack. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . As I entertained a doubt as to whether he was mentally normal on account of his keeping mum all the while. I wanted him to be examined by a doctor and therefore I did not arrest him immediately. "the discharge certificate of S. C. B. Medical College Hospital, Cuttack discloses that the accused was suffering from "cerebral Contusion (multiple ). " d. W. 1 is the doctor who has been examined to opine regarding the effect "contusion" in the brain and has stated as follows :-" "cerebral contusion" is an organic feature of the brain which can be detected by scanning. Such contusions may learned to insanity. Insanity can also cause cerebral contusions. xx xx xx contusions on the cerebrum i. e. cerebral contusion can be caused by trauma i. e. due to injuries, epilepsy, whooping caught, insanity or any other convulsing disorders. Infections of the brain can also cause such contusions. Insanity may follow contusions. Contusions may be caused by insanity. . . . . . . . " ( 13 ) IT would clearly appear from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and the discharge certificate that prior to the occurrence the appellant was becoming insane periodically and during that period he was assaulting persons at random for which he was being treated medically. P. W. 12, the brother-in-law of the appellant has deposed that his sister and her husband (appellant) were pulling on well which proves that there was absence of motive for commission of such crime. P. W. 2 has categorically deposed that at the proximity time of occurrence the accused was behaving like a mad man. P. W. 12, the brother-in-law of the appellant has deposed that his sister and her husband (appellant) were pulling on well which proves that there was absence of motive for commission of such crime. P. W. 2 has categorically deposed that at the proximity time of occurrence the accused was behaving like a mad man. The evidence of the A. S. I. (P. W. 16) discloses that immediately after the occurrence when he reached the place the accused was in a violent mood. Accused was sent for medical examination as his behaviour was abnormal. The opinion of the Doctor (P. W. 19), Ext. A, the medical report and opinion of D. W. 1 proves that immediately after the occurrence there was contusion in the brain of the accused which is one of the symptoms of insanity. ( 14 ) AFTER Considering all the materials on record, we come to the conclusion that when the appellant committed the offence, he was not in a position to understand the nature of his act owing to insanity at the crucial point of time. The facts, evidence and circumstances indicated above would clearly make out a case of legal insanity as provided in Section 84 of the Code. ( 15 ) FOR the above reasons, in our opinion, the finding of the trial Court that the plea of insanity was not available to the appellant, is not correct. Legally the accused is entitled to protection in terms of Section 84 of the Code. He is, therefore, to be acquitted and set at liberty. ( 16 ) BEFORE closing we cannot but observe an insane person when turns violent is a danger to the society, and therefore, becomes a liability to the society and the State. From the evidence of the witnesses we find that accused used to suffer from insanity periodically during which period was behaving violently. If law makers wanted to give him protection for his mental ailments, it is certainly a social obligation to see that he is cured and he does not continue to be a source of danger to the society. It will be, therefore, appropriate if the State Government makes arrangements for his treatment in accordance with law if it is found that he is continuing to be mentally imbalance. ( 17 ) IN result, appeal is allowed. It will be, therefore, appropriate if the State Government makes arrangements for his treatment in accordance with law if it is found that he is continuing to be mentally imbalance. ( 17 ) IN result, appeal is allowed. Conviction and sentence under Sections 302, 332 and 323, Indian Penal Code are set aside. S. C. MOHAPATRA, J. :- 18. I agree. Appeal allowed.