SALDANHA, J. ( 1 ) AN interesting facet of the law with regard to the doctrine of grave and sudden provocation was seriously debated in the course of hearing of this appeal by the appellant's learned counsel Mr. Jadhav. Essentially, he had sought to contend that if there was a background of serious injustice or aggravating circumstances which had driven the accused to a point of desperation that these factors would have to be cumulatively assessed by the Court as circumstances which could result in grave and sudden provocation which impels the accused to an act of violence. We shall briefly recount the salient features of the prosecution evidence in the background of which this aspect of the law will have to be resolved. ( 2 ) THE deceased was a Range Forest Officer working with the Forest Department. At the relevant time, he was posted at Belgaum and had come to Badami where his family was residing for the celebration of a feast. The accused had been earlier employed by the Department as a Mali on daily wages and it is not very clear as to under what circumstances and when his services had been discontinued. What has come on record is the fact that the accused was harbouring the confirmed view that the deceased was responsible for having removed him from his job and he therefore kept repeatedly meeting the deceased and asking him to do something about restoring his employment. The incident took place on 14-10-94 and it has come on record that on the previous day when the deceased arrived at Badami the accused met him at the Bus station and once again renewed his request that something should be done about his employment. The deceased pointed out to him that it was not in his hands. On the next day i. e. on 14-10-94 at about 1. 30 in the afternoon, the accused came to the house of the deceased and renewed his plea whereupon the deceased pointed out to him that he was now posted at Belgaum and furthermore that the accused should go to the superior authorities with his request/representation and he is supposed to have chided the accused with some degree of irritation asking him as to why the accused was repeatedly coming and asking him about the employment issue. The accused supposed to have whipped out a knife which he had at his waist and stabbed the deceased first on the neck and then on the abdomen with that knife. Both these injuries were on vital parts of the body and were sufficiently serious as a result of which the deceased virtually died on the spot. This incident had taken place in broad day light and was witnessed by several persons among others, by the wife and the daughter of the deceased and the son also claims that he came there just after the incident had taken place. The prosecution also alleges that the accused was arrested on the same day at 10 p. m. and that on the next day i. e. on 15-10-94, he is supposed to have made a certain statement pursuant to which the knife which was the murder weapon was recovered in the presence of panchas. The accused was charged with an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC as also Section 3 (2) and (v) of the S. C. and S. T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. The learned trial Judge at the conclusion of the trial convicted the accused under both the heads. The present appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence imposed on the accused. ( 3 ) BEFORE proceeding further, we need to record that as far as second charge is concerned, the appellant's learned counsel Mr. Jadhav submitted that merely because it has come on record that the deceased belonged to the Scheduled Caste, that this is no ground on which the accused can be convicted for an offence under this Act unless it is demonstrated that he has by his conduct said or done something that is directed to offend the sensibilities of the deceased in relation to the caste to which he belonged. The submission is that a scrutiny of the evidence will indicate that irrespective of what the evidence may establish with regard to the main charge, that there is no material to sustain the conviction under the subsidiary head. On a careful scrutiny of the record, we are in agreement with this submission as there is no justification for holding that the accused has committed any offence under the S. C. and S. T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and the conviction under this charge will therefore have to be set aside. On a careful scrutiny of the record, we are in agreement with this submission as there is no justification for holding that the accused has committed any offence under the S. C. and S. T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and the conviction under this charge will therefore have to be set aside. ( 4 ) COMING to the main charge, Mr. Jadhav submitted that the evidence will fall into two broad categories the first being the evidence of the family members and the second being the evidence of the independent persons and he points out to us that whereas the family members namely the wife P. W. 1, the daughter P. W. 3 and the son P. W. 7 have supported the prosecution case, that the other independent witnesses including the panchas to the recovery have not done so. His submission is that this would cast a serious doubt on the aspect of veracity because he was at pains to point out to us that the deceased had a none too good reputation. He has demonstrated that it has been brought on record that the deceased was alleged to have been in the habit of exploiting poor persons particularly those who were kept on daily wages by employing and re-employing them and depriving them of a part of their earnings by fraudulently and dishonestly withholding that money and pocketing it. Secondly, he has demonstrated that the accused was also alleged to have been misbehaving with these very poor employees by depriving them of their rations and that he was retaining the grains for himself. Thirdly, Mr. Jadhav has pointed out that the accused was even instrumental in getting the deceased prosecuted on the aforesaid charges. His submission is that in this background, the deceased had undoubtedly incurred the wrath of many poor persons and that these activities were so atrocious as to virtually push the victims to a situation whereby they wanted to hit back at the deceased and he submits that in this background, the accused was not the only aggrieved person and that there could have been several others who would want to settle scores with the deceased. The reason for this submission becomes clear from the fact that the learned counsel submitted that it was for this reason that the independent witnesses have all refused to support the prosecution version that it was the accused who was responsible for the death of the deceased and he submits that it is only the immediate family members who are interested in foisting the blame on the accused merely because they had seen him repeatedly approaching the deceased with his plea for reinstatement. He also submits that if one were to examine the evidence carefully, that it would be seen that the incident took place either at the entrance or possibly just in front of the residence of the deceased and that neither the wife nor the daughter could have witnessed it even if they were inside the house at that time. He submits that the son has come on the scene subsequently and has only tried to support the version of the other family members and in this background, the contention raised is that it would be unsafe to base a conviction on the evidence of interested witness without independent corroboration. This last submission is sought to be repulsed by the learned S. P. P. who perhaps rightly points out that P. Ws. 1, 3 and 7 are the most natural witnesses and even if they are family members that they can never be categorised as interested persons unless it is demonstrated that there was some animus between them and the accused or that there was some underlying reason why they would want to falsely implicate the accused. Not only is this contention well founded but we need to add here that merely because the witnesses are the family members, in the absence of any hostile background, that there is no ground on which their evidence can either be discarded or even watered down. We find in the present instance that the accused was known to these witnesses so they were in a position to identify him and, the incident has taken place in broad day light at close proximity and that therefore there should be no possibility of any mistaken identification. There is also a background to the incident viz. We find in the present instance that the accused was known to these witnesses so they were in a position to identify him and, the incident has taken place in broad day light at close proximity and that therefore there should be no possibility of any mistaken identification. There is also a background to the incident viz. that some talk has taken place prior to the assault and therefore, where the evidence is absolutely clear and cogent and where the evidence is consistent and where the witnesses virtually lend support to each other and more importantly, where the evidence is completely unshaken in cross-examination, the learned trial Judge was fully justified in having relied on this evidence for purposes of holding that the charge was proved. There was some debate with regard to the question of recovery evidence and Mr. Jadhav may be justified in his contention that in the absence of the independent panchas having supported the prosecution that this evidence cannot be relied upon to the extent that it would normally have been. All that we can say is that the recovery evidence is not absolutely conclusive but even in the absence of that evidence the material on record which completely falls in line with the medical evidence, in our considered view establishes the charge to the hilt. ( 5 ) THAT brings us to the second aspect of the case namely the submission canvassed by the appellant's learned Counsel that even assuming it is held that the accused had committed the act in question, whether it would come within the ingredients of Section 302, IPC. Here, there are several aspects of the matter which have been highlighted. Mr. Jadhav requested the Court to virtually get into the shoes of the accused for purposes of evaluating his mental make up when he pointed out that the accused belonged to the poorest of the poor strata of society who was hardly able to manage a temporary job for some time and that the loss of that job was sufficient to drive the accused to desperation and he lays heavy emphasis on the fact that the accused told the deceased that whereas he and his wife and children were starving, that the deceased was celebrating a feast. He submits that this amplifies the desperation of the accused and that it was virtually in this desperate condition that he was repeatedly asking the deceased to reinstate him. Mr. Jadhav has requested the Court to look to the misconduct of the deceased which according to him seriously compounds the situation because he submits that here was a poor man who was desperately pleading for a chance to earn his livelihood and support his family and he was up against an individual who was inconsiderate and corrupt even to the extent of exploiting the very poor temporary employees. According to Mr. Jadhav, the combination of these factors is sufficient to have driven the accused into a set of temporary insanity when the deceased arrogantly told him not to ask him anything and to go to the superiors. We did very carefully and in depth analyse the facts and the situation but there are also other aspects which need to be counter-balanced and which the learned S. P. P. has drawn our attention to. The first of these is the fact that even if the accused thought so, the deceased who was merely an R. F. O. was not the authority to take a decision in matters of employment and the accused had been told so more than once. Also, the deceased had been transferred to Belgaum and therefore had nothing to do with the reinstatement of the accused. The most incriminating factor which perhaps casts heavy doubt against the accused is that he came armed with a knife and this is not in consonance with the conduct of a person who is coming with a request or a plea but signifies an entirely different mental make up. The fact that the accused was armed with a knife would clearly indicate that he intended to use it, which he in fact did, and if this is the position, it would clearly indicate that he came to the house of the deceased on that day with the intention of attacking the deceased with that knife. Next, we are required to examine the manner in which the assault took place. The two injuries inflicted are both on the most vital parts of the body namely the neck and the abdomen. They are deep stab injuries inflicted with sufficient amount of force each of which are sufficient in the ordinary course to cause death. Next, we are required to examine the manner in which the assault took place. The two injuries inflicted are both on the most vital parts of the body namely the neck and the abdomen. They are deep stab injuries inflicted with sufficient amount of force each of which are sufficient in the ordinary course to cause death. The witnesses do not say anything about the accused having got infuriated or that there was some altercation or background that gave rise to this and these are the factors which we need to take into account for purposes for deciding as to whether the accused is entitled to the benefit of defence of grave and sudden provocation. ( 6 ) THE ultimate aspect of the law which one cannot lose sight of when a plea of grave and sudden provocation is put forward is that the provocation is required to be of a grave and serious nature and that it has got to be spontaneous. Something that has built up for a period of time or over the weeks would not justify such a defence though we do take note of the fact that there may be a small category of cases where such a background may reach a flash point if there is some provocation from the deceased to trigger a violent or volcanic reaction. In this case, the important evidence that could justify any such plea is totally lacking in so far as there is no provocation of any type that was forthcoming from the side of the deceased. In these circumstances, we are of the considered view that it would not be possible to afford the benefit of this defence to the accused. We need to add here, that it is necessary for this Court to observe after having carefully applied our mind to the facts of this case, that it has become an unfortunate trend in recent times which trend requires to be deprecated, to resort to violence in relation to matters related to unemployment and to carry out such threats. The law prescribes more than adequate remedies for redressal even in cases of injustice and we see no ground on which instances of intimidation and attacks of the present type can ever be justified. The law prescribes more than adequate remedies for redressal even in cases of injustice and we see no ground on which instances of intimidation and attacks of the present type can ever be justified. This trend has dangerous results and has also given rise to large scale indiscipline in various quarters and having regard to the fact that this is an unfortunate case, the violence has resulted in the loss of life. This Court cannot under any circumstances view the matter leniently. ( 7 ) HAVING regard to the aforesaid situation and having carefully reviewed the entire record and having bestowed our careful consideration to the submissions on points of fact and on law that have been canvassed by the two sides, we are of the view that the conviction of the accused under Section 302, IPC and the offence of R. I. for life awarded to him are both justified and that these findings and the order passed consequently do not require any interference. ( 8 ) IN the result, the appeal partially succeeds in so far as the conviction recorded by the trial Court under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the accused is set aside. The conviction under Section 302, IPC and the sentence awarded to the accused under this Section stands confirmed. ( 9 ) THE appeal partially allowed accordingly. Appeal partly allowed. --- *** --- .