JUDGMENT The appellant Kadti Papaiya was convicted in Sessions Trial No. 128/87 for commission of murder of his wife Kadti Kanni vide judgment and order dated 3.12.1987 under section 302 Indian Panel Code and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Aggrieved from the order of conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred the present appeal from prison. The deceased Kadti Kanni was the wife of the appellant who was put to death by the appellant, as per the prosecution case, in the night, while the appellant, his wife Kadti Kanni (the deceased), alongwith his sons Kadti Narayan and Chinta and his daughter Lachchi were sleeping and by a burning lukathi (a wooden piece) he caused injuries to the deceased as a result of which she succumbed to death. The FIR of the incident which took place in the night intervening between 23rd and 24th December, 1986, was lodged at P.S. Ussoor, Distt. Bastar on 24.12.1986 by PW 2 Vaasam Pojaiya, who was the brother of the deceased. The Lash Panchnama (Ex. P-12) was prepared and the body was sent to the post-mortem examination and the report of the post- mortem examination is Ex. P-10. In the post-mortem examination following injuries were found on the person of the deceased : (1) Lacerated wound present over left tempo-parietal region placed obliquely horizontal margin are irregular, clotted blood present over it, measuring 3" x 1" in size. (2) Misc. mark present over left fronto temporal region, placed obliquely vertical. Bluish brown in colour, just above the lateral part of left orbital margin measuring 2-1/2" x 1" in size. (3) Misc. mark present over left tempo-parietal region just behind and above the injury No. (1) placed vertically measuring 2-3/4" x 1" in size. In the opinion of the Doctor, the injury No. (1) (i.e. the head injury) was found fatal and sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The prosecution examined as many as six witnesses. (PW 1) Kadti Narayan, who was the son of the appellant, (PW 2) Vaasam Pojaiya, who was the brother of the deceased; (PW 3) Kadti Dharma, to whom the extrajudicial confession was made by the appellant; (PW 4) Baldeoram Patwari, who prepared the site plan; (PW 5) Upendraram, Head Constable, who conducted the investigation; (PW 6) Dr. (PW 1) Kadti Narayan, who was the son of the appellant, (PW 2) Vaasam Pojaiya, who was the brother of the deceased; (PW 3) Kadti Dharma, to whom the extrajudicial confession was made by the appellant; (PW 4) Baldeoram Patwari, who prepared the site plan; (PW 5) Upendraram, Head Constable, who conducted the investigation; (PW 6) Dr. A.R. Gota who conducted the post mortem examination of the body of the deceased, on 25.12.1986 at the Primary Health Centre, Beejapur. The trial Court, after considering the evidence on the record, found the appellant guilty for the charge as levelled against him, u/s 302 IPC, and convicted under section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant Shri Vakil Khan and the learned State counsel. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that it is a case where the accused should. be punished under section 304 Part II IPC as the appellant had no intention to cause death. The prosecution examined Kadti Narayan who is the son of the appellant himself and is the eye-witness to the incident, whose testimony the Court relied on and from the record, it has not been pointed out as to why the testimony of PW 1 Kadti Narayan should not be relied on. It is an admitted case of the appellant also that Kadti Narayan was also sleeping at the time when the deceased Kadti Kanni died. In defence, the appellant has only denied the charge but has accepted the fact that he alongwith his son and brother were sleeping in the same room and the appellant and his wife were sleeping on the same cot. The evidence is supported by extra judicial confession, though the testimony of PW 1 Kadti Narayan was itself sufficient for the purpose of conviction. It is not a case where the case of the appellant could be covered under any exception under section 300 IPC and no other inference can be drawn except the inference regarding willfully causing the death of Kadti Kanni and the injuries which were caused by the appellant to the deceased establish that the act was done with the knowledge and intention to cause death or such bodily injuries as are sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death and which fact has been proved by the opinion of the Doctor. Learned State counsel submitted that the appellant is a tribal and the behaviour of the tribal is of different type. Here, we are not concerned with the behaviour of a particular person but we are concerned with the law. As the liability of the appellant has been established by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt, we do not find that the conviction as recorded by the trial Court against the appellant suffers from any error. The appeal deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.