Judgment Sinha, J.: 1. This appeal is directed against a judgment of conviction and sentence dated 10th July, 1999 passed by Sri K.P. Dutta, Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair in Sessions Case No. 23 of 1995 whereby and whereunder the appellant herein was found guilty of commission of an offence of murdering his father under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted him to suffer imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to R.I. for six months. 2. The prosecution case shortly stated is as follows : The accused-appellant herein procured a Dah from the informant on 20th June, 1994 at about 15.30 hours. By the said Dah, he, allegedly, killed his father at about 16.00 hours on the said date in relation whereto he made a statement to the informant while he was passing by the side of the house of the informant. Hearing the same from the accused, the de facto-complainant rushed to the spot which was near the house of Haren Biswas, the deceased, and found him lying dead in a pool of blood with incised injuries on his neck, head, forehead, left shoulder. The dead body was covered up with a piece of cloth. There was blood stain on the shirt of the accused also. According to the prosecution, the motive for commission of the said crime was existence of dispute between the deceased and the appellant. 3. During investigation, the appellant, allegedly, made a confessional statement before a learned Magistrate on 27.6.95 under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was marked as Exbt. 10. The appellant was in Police Custody from 20.6.94 to 27.6.94. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted whereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge. 4. Before the learned Sessions Judge, the prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses. The prosecution also proved 16 items of documents which are as follows :- 1. F. I. R. (Exbt. 1) 2. Panchanama (Exbt. 2) 3. Supurdiginama (Exbt. 3) 4. Statements of witness Smt. Belarani Biswas under Section 164 Cr. P. C. (Exbt. 4) 5. State of witness Sadan Hawaladar under Section 164 Cr. P.C. (Exbt. 5) 6. Statement of witness Suren Hira under Section 164 Cr. P.C. marked 'X' for identification 7. Inquest report in respect of the dead body of Haren Biswas (Exbt. 6/3) 8. 3) 4. Statements of witness Smt. Belarani Biswas under Section 164 Cr. P. C. (Exbt. 4) 5. State of witness Sadan Hawaladar under Section 164 Cr. P.C. (Exbt. 5) 6. Statement of witness Suren Hira under Section 164 Cr. P.C. marked 'X' for identification 7. Inquest report in respect of the dead body of Haren Biswas (Exbt. 6/3) 8. Panchanama (Exbt. 7/2) 9. Panchanama (Exbt. 8) 10. P. M. E. report (Exbt. 9) 11. Confessional statement of the accused under Section 164 Cr. P.C. (Exbt. 10) 12. C.F.S.L report (Exbt. 11) in respect of 10 ml. dark brown fluid, i.e., blood sample of Kasinath Biswas 13. C. F. S. L. report and the seized articles namely, Dah, Shirt, Full pant, Dhoti and Soil (Exbt. 12) 14. Supplementary C. F. S. L. report (Exbt. 13) 15. Serologist report (Exbt. 14) 16. Site plan (Exbt. 15). It also proved five material exhibits which are : 1. Dah - Mat. Exbt. I 2. Pant - Mat. Exbt. II 3. Shirt - Mat. Exbt. III 4. Dhoti - Mat. Exbt. IV 5. 14 negative with enlarged photos - Mat. Exbt. V collectively. 5. P. W. I Dhiren Hira lodged the First Information Report (Exbt. 1). He supported his statements made in the First Information Report. He identified the weapon of the offence (Dah, Mat. Exbt. 1). In his deposition, he stated while he was coming from Kadamtala P.S., he found the Appellant with a Dah in his hand. The Thanadar seized the Dah, Full Pant and Full Shirt. A seizure list was prepared which was signed by him as also Gour Mallick (Exbts. 2 and 2/1). 6. P. W. 5 Sadan Hawaladar who has deposed that on 20.6.94 at about 3.30 p. m. while he had been proceeding towards his house at Atenjig, he saw Kasinath Biswas going ahead of him and he entered into his house when he found his father sitting on the varendah. He saw the accused going inside the room and had some talks with his father where• after he left. His statement had also been recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was marked as Exbts. 5, 5/1 and 5/2. In his deposition, the said witness further stated that he heard an altercation between the father and the son. His statement had also been recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was marked as Exbts. 5, 5/1 and 5/2. In his deposition, the said witness further stated that he heard an altercation between the father and the son. He after about half an hour heard a hue and cry and from one Chittaranjan Baroi who had not been examined, he came to learn that the Appellant bad killed his father. 7. P.W. 2 Rajen Haldar in his evidence stated that he had also seen the Appellant on that date after the incident. 8. P. W. 3 Bibhuti Biswas is a hearsay evidence who stated that he had heard from one Vijay Sarkar that the Appellant had committed the aforementioned offence. 9. P.W. 4 is Belarani Biswas who is wife of Bibbuti Biswas (P. W. 3). She also stated to have seen Kasinath standing on road with a Dah in hand. Her statement had also been recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was marked as Exbt. 4 series. She in her evidence as also in her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stated that the Appellant told before them that he is guilty and he begged for mercy in killing his father. She stated that the accused went to her house for some food. She went out for bringing food and she had left after the accused had left. 10. P.W. 6 Suren Hira was declared hostile. He, merely, stated that he had found the father of Kasinath lying on the road and not anything else. 11. P. W. 11 Namita Bachar was also declared hostile. She in her examination-in-chief stated that she had heard from her neighbours about murder of Haren Biswas. 12. P.W. 7 Sukumar Majumdar was the Prodhan of Kadamtala Gram Panchayat. He, merely, on hearing the incident rushed to the Police Station. He, however, is a witness to the Inquest Report besides Deben Majumdar and Satish Haldar. His signature had been marked as Exbt. 6. 13. The Investigating Officer, B. Saigal examined himself as P.W.16. However, the investigation was completed by P.W.17, A.K. Singh who submitted charge-sheet. 14 The learned trial Judge relied upon the extra-judicial confession as well as the confession made by the accused-appellant in his statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 6. 13. The Investigating Officer, B. Saigal examined himself as P.W.16. However, the investigation was completed by P.W.17, A.K. Singh who submitted charge-sheet. 14 The learned trial Judge relied upon the extra-judicial confession as well as the confession made by the accused-appellant in his statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Sessions Judge held that although the Judicial Magistrate who recorded the said confession of the accused-appellant was not examined the same would not be vital and despite his non-examination, the confessional statement made under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be relied upon. As regard retraction of the Appellant from his confessional statement, the learned Sessions Judge held that having regard to the fact that the learned Judicial Magistrate before recording the said statement meticulously followed the procedure required therefor and having further regard to the fact that the confession made by the Appellant although retraced had sufficiently been corroborated in material particulars, reliance thereupon can be placed. 15. The learned Sessions Judge further held that such confessional statement is also buttressed by the subsequent fact of his going and surrendering to Rangat Police Station. In this connection, the learned Sessions Judge relied upon the evidence of P. W. 12 Gouranga Mallick who had testified that Kasinath Biswas laid down the blood stained Dah on the table in SHO's room whereupon it was seized. The wearing apparel of the accused-appellant had also been seized. He, in his evidence, stated that he was beside Jadav Ostad when the accused appellant entered the Police Station. According to him, the table was' on the left hand side of the entry door at a distance of 10 ft. therefrom and the Dah was picked up from the table and packed up by the SHO. 16. The learned Sessions Judge also relied upon the medical evidence, inquest report, Post Mortem Report, position disclosed in the site plan (Exbt. 15), as also CFSL report (Exbt. 11), result of examination report (Exbt. 12), supplementary CFSL report (Exbt. 13) and the report of the Serologist (Exbt. 14). 17. P.W.15 Dr. K.L. Joardar had deposed that after the Post Mortem Examination Dr. Kashyap of CFSL was available in the APWD Guest House about 11/2 months after conducting the Post Mortem Report. In his presence 10 ml. 11), result of examination report (Exbt. 12), supplementary CFSL report (Exbt. 13) and the report of the Serologist (Exbt. 14). 17. P.W.15 Dr. K.L. Joardar had deposed that after the Post Mortem Examination Dr. Kashyap of CFSL was available in the APWD Guest House about 11/2 months after conducting the Post Mortem Report. In his presence 10 ml. blood of four persons, viz., Appellant, his mother, brother and sister were taken in presence of Dr. Kashyap and upon sealing the same, the syringe containing the blood was handed over to SHO. The said fact was also corroborated by P.W. 16. Before the learned Sessions Judge, the aforementioned fact was not questioned while P.Ws. 15 and 16 were being examined. 18. P.W. 16 also stated that he had collected the report of CFSL on 17.11.1994 and the supplementary report (Exbt. 13) on 17.12.1994. The said statement had also not been challenged in cross-examination. 19. The Appellant in his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure although denied that sample of his blood had been taken but stated that he did not know as to whether sample of blood of others had been taken or not. 20. From the result of bio-chemical and microscopic test, the blood stains on Exbt. 1 (Dah), Exbt. 2 (Shirt), Exbt. 3 (Full Pant), Exbt. 4 (Dhoti) and dark brown fluid (Mat. Exbts. I to IV) and Exbts. 7 to 10 were all found to be human origin. Groups of blood of Kasinath Biswas, his father Harabilash Biswas, his sister Smt. Bhaduri Kullu and his mother Smt. Amodini Biswas are all 'B' positive. Blood stain on Dah, Shirt, Full Pant, Dhoti belonging to Group 'B', which originated from deceased's blood Group 'B'. The blood group, therefore, of the members of the family including the deceased was of the same group which tallied with the blood stains found on the wearing apparel of the accused. 21. P. W. 15 proved the Post Mortem Report and opined that owing to several incised injuries caused by a sharp cutting weapon at the back of neck, centre of head, frontal surface of head, a neurogenic and haemorrhagic shock took place resulting the death of the deceased. 22. The main questions which arise for consideration in this appeal, thus, are : 1. Whether the confessional statement of the Appellant is admissible in evidence? 2. 22. The main questions which arise for consideration in this appeal, thus, are : 1. Whether the confessional statement of the Appellant is admissible in evidence? 2. Whether the learned Sessions Judge erred in disbelieving the statement of the Appellant retracing from his confession? 3. Whether the prosecution has otherwise been able to bring home the charge against the Appellant? 23. The confessional statement was recorded by Sri H. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Mayabandar on 24 6.1994. He also recorded the confessional statement of other witnesses as noticed hereinbefore. The alleged confessional statement of the Appellant is a long one. He stated : “Then our house got destroyed in a fire. Therefore, my father beat up my mother mercilessly and expelled her from the house and he himself went to Calcutta. He kept shifting his place of residence from Little Andaman, Calcutta, Port Blair ete. etc. Therefore, our mother brought us to her brother's house at Rangat. My maternal uncle (Mama) was very poor. We somehow survived in dire economic conditions. Then my grandmother and uncle took we three brothers and one sister to their house at Kadamtala. I lived in the house of my uncles Bibhuti Biswas and Naren Biswas who brought us up and met our needs. After several years my father returned from Calcutta. He again prepared a house and then we went to live with our father for a short span of time. Whenever our mother came to see us, my father used to assault her and she used to return without being able to meet us with bleeding head injuries on account of assaults by my father. There was none to protest, resist or stop the torture being inflicted by my {l-dther on my mother and us. When my elder sister grew up, she went to live with my uncle on being driven out by my father. My elder brother was forced to live separately when he grew up as my father repeatedly told him to go away and assault him regularly. Thereafter, my father took me and my sister Bhaduri Kullu to Kadamtala market. Thereafter, we again returned to our home and we lived together for a few days in the house of our uncles. Then my father with the help of myself and my elder brother, prepared another house. Thereafter, my father got my elder brother married. Thereafter, my father took me and my sister Bhaduri Kullu to Kadamtala market. Thereafter, we again returned to our home and we lived together for a few days in the house of our uncles. Then my father with the help of myself and my elder brother, prepared another house. Thereafter, my father got my elder brother married. After marriage, my sister-in-law told father to bring her mother-in-law as well. As Soon as she raised this question, my father told my elder brother and sister-in-law to leave the house. He expelled them from the house and then he went away to Calcutta for six years and I don't know what he did there at Calcutta. We again brought our mother back to us. So long as my father was away, we all lived happily. After six years when he returned we thought by now my father has become alright. My mother showed me her broken finger which my father had broken. My father after assaulted my uncle Naren Biswas with Monai without any reason. We had to bear with such conduct of our father and allegations turn others on account of his conduct. On his return, he again started quarrelling with all of us and he always extorted money from us and kept the money in the Bank or the Post Office. We often advised him to retire and live in peace so that we may run the house and feed him. He used to took his own food and never allowed any on cook for him on account of his religious beliefs. He often insisted immediate fulfilment of his demands on our failure to meet his demands such as supply of cooking vessels etc., he started prolonged quarrels. Since after we grew up, he could not assault us, he used to assault our mother whenever he became angry with us. We often touched his feet and begged him. to .spare our mother. He used to sell off cocoanut and supari in the garden and deposit the money in the Bank and told us that he had no money. When Suren Rira got a tree cut turn the lands of Sadhan in the Hills with his consent, my father told him to give him Rs. 600/- failing which he told them that he would inform the Forest Department. Such was his attitude towards his neighbours. When Suren Rira got a tree cut turn the lands of Sadhan in the Hills with his consent, my father told him to give him Rs. 600/- failing which he told them that he would inform the Forest Department. Such was his attitude towards his neighbours. He did not allow any person other than a Hindu to even enter our house. Whenever a quarrel started, he used to abuse us ceaselessly. He abused all of us including my uncles, aunts and their daughters as well. I told my father either to love us and leave the villagers or love the villagers and live us, but he paid no heed. During the life time of my Grandmother my middle uncle came to Kalapahar and encroached Government lands. My father told my younger uncle to vacate the house occupied by him as be wanted to make a temple there. On his return from Calcutta, he later expelled my mother, my elder brother and myself. I now reside to Kalapahar. My younger uncle oflen cried at my father's such behaviour and told him that be had four daughters and pleaded for his mercy. We often comforted him but in vain. After expelling all members of the family from the house, now my father was enjoying the properties alone happily. My father used to say conversations between my uncle and aunt. One day after a quarrel my father went to the P. S. and lodged a complaint against us. When the Police called me I saw the Police Station for the first time in my life. On being expelled by father I along F with my mother came to Kalapahar since the last one year. I often visited Kadamtala and lived in the house of my uncles. On the date of incident, I had gone to Kadamtala to get my Identity Card prepared turn the Panchayat Office at Kadamtala. On arrival at Kadamtala, I was told that Identity Card shall be prepared on 23.6.94. I met my elder brother at Kadamtala. On 20.6.94, I went to Rangat by 9.00 a.m. Bus turn Mayabandar. At Rangat my elder brother told me that he had to go to Tehsil Office to get half of the land mutated in mother's name. On 20.6.94, I went to the house of my father's sister's husband at Kadamtala. I met my elder brother at Kadamtala. On 20.6.94, I went to Rangat by 9.00 a.m. Bus turn Mayabandar. At Rangat my elder brother told me that he had to go to Tehsil Office to get half of the land mutated in mother's name. On 20.6.94, I went to the house of my father's sister's husband at Kadamtala. There Boudi told me that she did not have cooked rice and told me to wait till she cooked rice. Then I went away and met Parimal on the way. Parimal told me that my father had broken half of the house and now the younger uncle would go away from their paternal house. I then went to the house of Biswajit Samaddar. There I found my deedi Maan (mother-in law of my middle uncle) almost crying and telling me that my uncle would most probably come away from the broken house. Then I went to the house of Suren Hira. There, I again asked cooked rice from his wife whom I address as Boudi. She told me that she had none. Then I went to the house of my Chhoto Kaka (smaller uncle). I asked her also for food. She told me that she had none. I saw the house in broken condition at several places. Seeing the house of my uncle so broken by my father, I became very angry. I felt very sad and angry (starts weeping at this stage) because the very people who brought us up in absence of our father in our childhood were being forced to leave the house by my father in such manner. Then I decided that today I shall settle the matter. My father was doing all this as he wanted to sell off the lands after getting all concerned vacate the house. He staled so to me previously also. Then I went to the house of Suren Hira and I asked him if he had any Dah or not. He told me that his Dah was broken and showed me. So, I did not take his broken Dah, Then I went to the house of Dhiren Rira. I told Dhiren Rira to give me his Dah as wanted to cut and shape cane. Dhiren Da showed me the Dah and told me that its handle is bit loose and asked me to be cautious about it. So, I did not take his broken Dah, Then I went to the house of Dhiren Rira. I told Dhiren Rira to give me his Dah as wanted to cut and shape cane. Dhiren Da showed me the Dah and told me that its handle is bit loose and asked me to be cautious about it. Then I took the Dah, hid the same inside my full shirt and went to the house of my father. There I told my father why in spite of my repeated requests in the post, he was bent upon expelling my uncle who was his real brother as well. We had an altercation and I told my father that day I would not leave him. Then I brought out the Dah. Then a scuffle ensued between me and my father. My father got hold of the Dah. But, I after a scuffle was able to snatch it away from him again. Then my father left me and ran out of the house. As soon as my father came to the road, I gave the first stroke of Dah on his head from behind. Then I gave one stroke of Dah aimed at his neck, but it fell on his back as my hand shook a little. After the first assault, the handle of the Dah got separated. So, I held the Dah with my band to repeat the assault, as a result whereof I sustained a cut injury on the base of my right hand index-finger. (shows the injury which now appears to be only on the dead surface of the skin after healing in the form of a small non-bleeding flap of skin). Thereafter, I gave two more strokes of Dah on the neck of my father after he fell down. I gave him in all five strokes of Dah, i.e., first on his head, then on the side of his neck, then on his back and then on his neck twice after his fall. I had with me some money that brought from one Madhu Sudhan Samaddar for the purpose of getting my Identity Card prepared and to purchase oil and other rations, I had borrowed Rs. 130/- from him. Enroute I met Chhoto Kaki Maan who started weeping on learning about the incident and hearing of the same from me. I had with me some money that brought from one Madhu Sudhan Samaddar for the purpose of getting my Identity Card prepared and to purchase oil and other rations, I had borrowed Rs. 130/- from him. Enroute I met Chhoto Kaki Maan who started weeping on learning about the incident and hearing of the same from me. She started rebuking me as to why I killed my father as this mattered little if they had to shift turn the house. I told her that I did what I thought best and I told her not to weep over it. Then I gave the money and list to the son of my elder brother as my aunty was then weeping. Boudi was then also present there. Thereafter, I went to the P. S. in whatever condition was in with the Dah in my hand along with its handle. I had in my pocket my own money as well. I slated the entire incident at the P. S. I have done all this for the benefit of my elder brother whose condition is so pitiable that one feels guilty to see his condition. I committed this offence unable to bear the torture and conduct of my father. I have nothing more to state." 24. The statement made by the Appellant herein under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being so elaborate, it is difficult to concede that such a statement had been made involuntarily. It has been conceded at the Bar that all the procedural requirements therefor had been complied with by the Judicial Magistrate. 25. It further stands admitted that the learned Judicial Magistrate had gone to the extent even putting a question to the Appellant as to whether he wanted to have the assistance of a Lawyer at that stage. 26. The submission of Mr. Parekh, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant to the effect that the learned Judicial Magistrate having regard to the fact that the Appellant had retraced from his confession ought to have also put querries to him as to why he was making the said statement or as to what prompted him to do that cannot be accepted. Whether a confession has been made voluntarily or not must be Judged from the fact situation of each case. 27. Whether a confession has been made voluntarily or not must be Judged from the fact situation of each case. 27. The only requirement is that the procedural safeguards to which the accused is entitled must be borne in mind by the Judicial Magistrate before recording the statement of an accused under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Judicial Magistrate need not provide him other and further safeguards to which he is not entitled, on the assumption that the accused may retrace from his confessional statement. The veracity of a voluntary confession which is later on retraced must be considered having regard to the fact situation obtaining in each case. The Court is required to look for corroboration. 28. In the instant case, there is no eye-witness. The prosecution case has been proved, inter alia, on the basis :- 1. Confession of the accused before the Judicial Magistrate in terms of Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Extra-judicial confession made before P. Ws. 1, 4 and other witnesses. 3. The Appellant was last seen with the deceased. 4. He himself had gone to the de facto-complainant and refused to return the Dah to him on the ground that he has killed his father. 5. He himself had gone to the Police Station with the Dah and he was arrested there. 29. Each one of the aforementioned circumstantial evidences may by themselves be insufficient to record a finding of guilt, but cumulative effect thereof should be given in a case of this nature for the purpose of considering as to whether the prosecution has been able to prove the guilt beyond all shadow of doubt. 30. The analysis of evidence on record is clear and manifest of fact that the prosecution has been able to bring home the charge against the Appellant beyond any reasonable doubt. 31. Furthermore, the 'nature of injuries as would appear from the Post Mortem Report is also a pointer to the fact that such injuries bad been inflicted by reason of the weapon like Dab. In the Post Mortem Report, it bas been stated : "1. One incised injury at frontal surface of the head starting from left eye brow to anterior part of the right parietal region of the head. Length of the injury was 5 inch length, 1'th inch breadth and 1/2th inch depth. 2. In the Post Mortem Report, it bas been stated : "1. One incised injury at frontal surface of the head starting from left eye brow to anterior part of the right parietal region of the head. Length of the injury was 5 inch length, 1'th inch breadth and 1/2th inch depth. 2. Incised wound at the centre of the head starting from left posterior part of the frontal region to right posterior part of the parietal region of the head. Length was 6 inches, breadth was 1/2th inch and depth t inch. 3. Incised wound at the back side of the neck at the level of 4th cervical vertebra starting from just below the right side of chin to the left side of the neck one inch below the angle of the left mandible. Length was 9 inch, 2 inches breadth and 3 inches depth. 4. Incised wound at the left upper part of the back 4 inch below the left shoulder. Length 4 inches, breadth 2 inches and depth half inches. " 32. It. may be true as has been submitted by Mr. Parekh to the effect that whereas the Appellant in his statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is said to have inflicted five blows only four marks of injuries had been found by the Doctor. Regard being had to the nature of the injuries and the extent thereof, the chances of two blows having been inflicted at the same place cannot be ruled out. In any event, such a minor deviation resulting from the statement of the Appellant cannot be said to be fatal in nature. 33. The criticism of evidence of P. W. 5 by Mr. Parekh to the effect that he has contradicted himself in his statement made in Examination-ill-Chief and the cross-examination is also of little or of no moment. The said witness stated that he had seen both the deceased and the Appellant together. However, in cross-examination he stated that he had crossed the house and, thereafter, both of them entered into the room and, thus, he could not have seen them. 34. It stands admitted that there bad been some altercations. The said witness stated that he had seen both the deceased and the Appellant together. However, in cross-examination he stated that he had crossed the house and, thereafter, both of them entered into the room and, thus, he could not have seen them. 34. It stands admitted that there bad been some altercations. Even if there is some inconsistency in the statement of this witness in this regard the same being minor in nature would not by itself sufficient to disbelieve him, at least a part of his evidence to the effect that the Appellant had been going ahead of him to the house of his father is not disputed. 35. The learned Counsel is also not correct in his submission that all extra-judicial confessions must be reproduced in verbatim by the witnesses before whom the same had been made. In the instant case, however, P.W. 1 and other witnesses had stated the same in verbatim the statement of the Appellant before the witnesses to the effect that he had committed an offence and, thereafter, he begged for their pardon as he killed his father had been stated by all the witnesses. No inconsistency therein has been pointed out. 36. Having regard to the materials, on, record we are of the opinion that the learned Sessions Judge has not committed any error in passing the impugned judgment. The alternative submission of Mr. Parekh that having regard to the back drop of the case, the "Appellant at best may be held to have committed an offence under Section 304, Part-I of the Indian Penal Code cannot also be accepted. He, as per the evidence of witnesses came to Kadamtala from Kalapahar and asked for a Dah from P.W. 1. On enquiry as to what he would do with it, he stated that he would cut some canes. The house of Haren Biswas, the deceased, was about 100 Metr. off from his house. He went with the Dah. After an altercations with the deceased he gave him four blows, each one of each would have been sufficient to cause death. It, therefore, cannot be said to be a case where the offence was committed upon sudden provocation or that he did not have any mens rea therefor. For the reasons aforementioned there is no merit in this appeal which is accordingly, dismissed. Sen, J.: I agree.