JUDGMENT A.A. Desai, J. -The Additional Sessions Judge. Chandrapur, on the basis of a circumstantial evidence, recorded a finding of conviction against the appellant-accused for having committed murder of his wife Bhadubai and son Santosh between the night of 13th and 14th January. 1994 at the residential premises at Ballarshah. District chandrapur. The learned Judge considered the crime as heinous and awarded capital punishment of death. Hence, reference is made vide Confirmation Case No.2 of 1996. Both are heard together.2. Mr. Daga, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-accused, made a submission that the circumstances as brought on record are not clinching. They do not provide any irresistible conclusion that the accused along was responsible for homicidal death of two persons. The important aspect on which the learned counsel placed reliance is that the prosecution has not proved as a circumstance that the accused was present inside the house where two persons met with homicidal death. Hence, the chain of circumstances is not complete and it is, therefore, not safe to record a finding of conviction. 3. Having regard to the submission as made, we examined the material as placed on record. Undisputedly, deceased Bhadubai and Santosh are respectively wife and son of the appellant-accused. Undisputedly further, they reside together. Furthermore, the place where the crime took place, is a place of normal residence of all the three. There is no fourth person as inmate of the premises. P.W. 8. A.C.P. Petkar has deposed that at about 3.58 A.M., accused came to the Police Station and reported about the incident of death. With these facts on record, we safely presume that at the relevant time, the accused was also inmate of the premises. The incident leading to homicidal death took place while he was inside the house." As a settled proposition, now the accused is responsible to examine the circumstances, which were prevailing at the time of death of two persons. The accused has, not offered any explanation in this regard. Omitting to offer any plausible explanation is fatal to the defence. At this stage, Mr. Daga has urged that there is a possibility that accused might have come from outside and he might have seen two persons injured and then he might have reported the matter to the police. However, according to the learned, counsel, it could not be conclusively taken that he was present at the place. At this stage, Mr. Daga has urged that there is a possibility that accused might have come from outside and he might have seen two persons injured and then he might have reported the matter to the police. However, according to the learned, counsel, it could not be conclusively taken that he was present at the place. Even this has not come by way of explanation from the accused. As such, we accept that the accused was present when the incident took place and he reported the matter to P.W. 8 A.C.P. Petkar. 4. The main contention of Mr. Daga is that the accused was insane and he might have committed a crime when he was loaded with insanity. As such, he is entitled to benefit. We have also examined the matter having regard to the plea as raised. The question before us is whether the accused was insane while assaulting the two persons. The material, which has brought on record, indicates that the appellant had a superstition that he has derived divine power and has become a replica of God Vishnu. He further projected, himself on that line appealing people to believe. He further carried a belief that the day would come that cobra will appear in his eyes. Loaded with this superstition, he might have committed the act of crime. But to us, this could not be an nsanity, as envisaged by Section 84 of I.P.C. The background, as discussed, could be a motive for the accused. The motive, as discussed, has no rationale, but still it would not be the act of insanity. 5. The learned Additional Sessions Judge discussed this aspect at length in para 10 of the impugned judgment and rejected the plea. Moreover, the act of the accused that immediately after the incident, going to the Police Station and reporting the incident and while doing so, locking the door of the hutment, makes the things explicit that he was aware about his act and his further act of reporting to the appropriate authority was a conscious behaviour and this takes away the merit of the plea of insanity, as tried to be urged by Mr. Daga 6. Lastly and faintly. Mr. Daga 6. Lastly and faintly. Mr. Daga urged that the act of the accused could not be one punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. According to the learned counsel, the accused has no intention to take the lives of two persons. On the background of superstition, to believe the idols of deities, as could be seen from the spot panchanama, he wanted to offer the blood of his kith and kin and, for taking out the blood, he might have did the act, but that could pot be either with intention or knowledge to cause death of two persons. Hence, the submission of the learned counsel is that the offence would be one punishable under Section 304 Part I of I.P.C. 7. We also gave our anxious consideration on the submission. Undisputedly, the death resulted owing to injury by cutting at the neck. We find it difficult to accept that because the accused has, with his free will choice, selected that part of the body for extracting the blood for being offered to the idols of deities. It is also difficult for us to accept that the accused could not have a knowledge that causing injury to that part of the body, would result in death in normal course. In view of this, we do not propose to accept the submission, as found, that the death was practically instantaneous. Hence, the finding of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C., as recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, is just and proper. 8. We have heard Mr. Dhote, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. He vehemently argued before us to support the capital punishment of death, as proposed by the learned Judge. According to Mr. Dhote, this is a heinous crime and thereby accused has disentitled himself to live in the Society. Mr. Dhote, therefore, canvassed before us for the confirmation of the capital sentence. In reply, we have also heard Mr. Daga, who has vehemently opposed the confirmation. 9. No doubt, the behaviour of the accused while committing the crime was unusual. The motive, which is brought on record, is also of extra-ordinary character. While loaded with the superstition, the crime has been committed. In reply, we have also heard Mr. Daga, who has vehemently opposed the confirmation. 9. No doubt, the behaviour of the accused while committing the crime was unusual. The motive, which is brought on record, is also of extra-ordinary character. While loaded with the superstition, the crime has been committed. Even then, to us, it may not be one of such case, which would warrant ulitimate punishment of death and hence the confirmation, as solicited by the learned Sessions Judge, cannot be granted. ORDER The finding of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. is hereby confirmed. Death Sentence, as proposed by the impugned judgment is hereby set aside. Instead we direct the accused-appellant to suffer imprisonment for life. The reference for confirmation is rejected. Appeal is partly allowed. Appeal allowed partly.