JUDGMENT S.N. JHA & P.N. YADAV, JJ. The appellant of this appeal has been convicted under Section 302 of the Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life. 2. The case of the prosecution is as follows. Ram Bihari alias Bipin Singh, deceased of this case, was employed in tile Irrigation department on muster roll basis. The salary being allegedly irregular he stopped contributing to the household expenditure as a result of which the appellant, his full brother, was annoyed with him and separated for 8 years prior to the occurrence. 3-4 years ago Ram Bihari Purchased a house from one Hari Sao. The purchase led to further animosity between the two. The appellant often gave threat that he would kill his brother and make his wife widow. He had grown beard and hair taking a vow that unless he kills Ram Bihari he will not shave. In the night of 24/25.3.92 the wife of Ram Bihari Mithila Devi, who is informant of the case, slept with her husband on the upper floor of the Dalan. At about 3 A.M. She came down stairs for her daily yes. At about 4 a.M. she heard sound appearing to be of her husband. She rushed. When she was climbing the stairs she saw the appellant coming down and fleeing away. On entering the room she found her husband lying in pool of the blood on the floor. He was dead. Seeing this she started shouting that the appellant was fleeing away after killing her husband. On hearing her shout the members of the family and villagers, namely, Umesh Sharma, Dinesh Narayan Singh, Santosh Kumar, Binod Sharma and Onkar Nath came. She informed them about the occurrence. Later she went to the police station along with sc lie of the villagers carrying the blood stained piece of sword and knife which were found near hers husband's dead body. 3. The Fardebeyan of Mithila Devi to the above effect was recorded at the Hilsa police station by the officer-in-charge, S.I. Aditya Prasad at 7.15 A.M. He assigned the investigation of the case to S.I. Deepak Lal who immediately proceeded for the place of occurrence reaching there at 8.15 A.M. He held inquest and thereafter recorded the, statements of the witnesses. After completing necessary formalities, finally, he submitted charge-sheet against the appellant. 4. After completing necessary formalities, finally, he submitted charge-sheet against the appellant. 4. At the trial the prosecution examined 8 witnesses to prove its case out of whom P.W.6 Dinesh Narayan Singh was tendered. The Doctor who held the post mortem, namely, Dr. Md. Muzibur Rahman was examined as P.W.3. The Officer-in-charge who had recorded the fardbeyan namely, S.I. Aditya Prasad was examined as P.W.7 The investigating Officer S.I. Deepak Lal was examined as P.W.8. Mithila Devi herself was examined as P.W.1 while her daughter Daisy Kumari was examined as P.W. 2 Besides them, Shatrughan Prasad Singh who had seen the appellant fleeing away from the place of occurrence was examined as P.W.4 Umesh Sharma who too claimed to have seen the appellants at the place of occurrence was examined as P.W.5. Thus, apart from the official witnesses i.e. the doctor and the police officers, the material witnesses on facts are p.ws. 1, 2, 4, and 5. 5. P.W. 1 Mithila Devi reiterated her fardbeyan version. She stated that at about 3 O'clock in the morning he got up and started doing her routine domestic work. While she was so engaged, she heard the sound of her husband and rushed towards the upper storey. At that point of time while she was midway on the stairs she saw the appellant coming down. His clothes were smeared with blood. She started shouting and rushed. When she reached the room in which her husband was sleeping she found him dead. There were injuries on different parts of the body. She found a broken piece of sword, 9 inches long, and a 5 inches long knife on the floor. They were smeared with blood. On hearing her shout her daughter Daisy Kumari, Shatrughan Singh, Umesh Singh and others, came there. The too stated to have seen the appellant fleeing away from the place. She along with witnesses went to the police station carrying the said broken piece of sword and knife and narrated the incident to the Officer-in-charge he reduced her statement to writing. She affixed her signature on it. Umesh Sharma and Shatrughan Singh too put their signature as witnesses. She explained that the appellant was nursing a grudge against her husband, after he stopped sending money to meet the household expenditure. Thereafter partition took place. After 3 years of the partition her husband purchased a house from a Teli (Hari Sao). She affixed her signature on it. Umesh Sharma and Shatrughan Singh too put their signature as witnesses. She explained that the appellant was nursing a grudge against her husband, after he stopped sending money to meet the household expenditure. Thereafter partition took place. After 3 years of the partition her husband purchased a house from a Teli (Hari Sao). The appellant believed that the money from which the house was purchased had been dishonestly appropriated by his brother and was therefore nursing a grievance aginat him and used to threaten that he will make her a widow. 6. P.W. 2 Daisy Kumari, the daughter of the deceased, in her evidence stated that while she was sleeping in the house which her father had purchased from the Teli in the night of 24/25.3.92 at about 4 A.M. She was awakened by her mother. She was sweeping the house when she heard her mother shouting. She immediately rushed to the Dalan where her parents slept. On way while at the gate of the Dalan she saw the appellant fleeing away. His clothes were stained with blood: Upstairs she found here father lying dead. Her mother was crying by his side. Daisy also stated that after her father purchased the house the appellant started feeling jealous and he often gave threat that he would kill him. 7. P.W. 4 Shatrghan Prasad Singh stated in his evidence that on 25.3.92 at about 3/4 A.M. when he was in his house he heard the shout coming from the house of Bipin Singh He rushed towards the house. He saw the appellant running away in a nervous state. When he went on the upper storey of the house of Bipin Singh he found his dead body lying on the floor in a pool of blood. Mithlla Devi disclosed that the appellant had killed her husband and ran away. P.W.4 further stated that the appellant and deceased lived separately. There had been partition between them. Further, there was animosity between the two on account of purchase of the house from Hari Sao. The appellant believed that his brother had dishonestly purchased the house. Mithlla Devi disclosed that the appellant had killed her husband and ran away. P.W.4 further stated that the appellant and deceased lived separately. There had been partition between them. Further, there was animosity between the two on account of purchase of the house from Hari Sao. The appellant believed that his brother had dishonestly purchased the house. P.W.4 further stated that he had accompanied Mithila Devi to the police Station where she gave her fardbeyan and handed over a knife and broken piece of sword containing stains of blood to the Officer-in charge who prepared a seizure memo on which he signed as witness, he further stated that while he was at the police station the appellant was apprehended and brought there. The Officer-in-charged a seizure memo on which too he signed as witness. 8. P.W. 5 Umesh Sharma in his evidence stated that on 25.3.92 at about 4/5 A.M. when he was returing from his field he heard the shout. He went to the house of deceased Bipin, Singh. There he saw Bipin Singh lying in a pool of blood on the floor by the side of, Chouki. On the Chouki there were marks of blood. The wife of Bipin Singh and his children were crying. The wife i.e. Mithila Devi was saying that the appellant had killed her husband and fled away. He stated that he accompanied Mithila Devi to Hilsa Police Station along with other villagers where she gave her fardbeyan which was recorded by the Officer-in -charge. On the fardbeyan the informant put her signature. He too put his signature as witness. The said broken piece of sword and Knife were seized by the Officer-in-charge and seizure memo was prepared on which also he put his signature. The Officer-in -charge later prepared seizure memo of the Dhoti and shirt which the appellant had put on and on that seizure memo also he put his signature as a witness. In cross-examination he stated that Dhoti and Shirt were given by the appellant to the Officer-in -charge in his presence. 9. On behalf of the appellant it was submitted that the prosecution has not come out with the true version of the occurrence. In cross-examination he stated that Dhoti and Shirt were given by the appellant to the Officer-in -charge in his presence. 9. On behalf of the appellant it was submitted that the prosecution has not come out with the true version of the occurrence. From the post mortem report-it would appear that a number of injuries were inflicted on the deceased on different parts of the body and it is unlikely that he would not have raised alarm and shouted for help and if it were so, his wife who claims to be present down stairs must have heard his cries. Mithila Devi however, claims to have heard some sound coming from the room in which her husband had slept only when the appellant was allegedly coming down on the stairs i.e. after he had perpetrated the crime. According to the counsel the circumstances suggest that Mithila Devi was not present in the house and therefore had no occasion to see the appellant coming down stairs or fleeing away at the time of the occurrence. We find no substance in this submissions. 10. Mithila Devi clearly stated in her evidence that after she woke up at 3 A.M. she went to the other house, described as Janani Kita to ease herself. Another reason for going to that house seems to be that her two children including P.W.2 Daisy Kumari used to sleep in that house and Daisy Kumari had to be awakened for doing the routine chores. Daisy Kumari, in fact, stated in her evidence that she was awakened by her mother where after she started doing the household work. The utensils had to be washed to prepare her younger brother for the school. Mithita Devi stated in her evidence that when she went to the other house the gate of Dalan remained open. To the same effect is the evidence of Daisy Kumari who stated that when she came to the Dalan on hearing the cries of her mother, she found the gate open. It appears that taking advantage of the gate the appellant surreptitiously entered the house wher1 Mithila Devi was away to the Janani Kita for answering the call of nature. The house of the appellant was almost adjacent to the place of occurrence. It appears that taking advantage of the gate the appellant surreptitiously entered the house wher1 Mithila Devi was away to the Janani Kita for answering the call of nature. The house of the appellant was almost adjacent to the place of occurrence. If thus Mithila Devi did not hear the cries of the deceased when he was being assaulted, it cannot be said that her version of seeing the appellant on the stairs when she was going upstairs to her husband’s room becomes in-probable. If at the time of assault who was not present, she was not expected to hear the cries of the deceased. 11. It is to be kept in mind that the fardbeyan of the case was lodged within three hours of the occurrence at the police station situate at a distance of about 8 kms. As per the evidence of P.W.5 Umesh Sharma, they had gone to the police station on foot. In fact, from the evidence of PW.4 Shatrughan Singh as indeed P.W. 2 it appears that the name of the appellant was disclosed by Mithila Devi even before she had set out for the police station. Her version of occurrence finds corroboration from the evidence of P.W.4, an independent witness, besides P.W.2 Daisy Kumari. It is relevant to mention here that no contradiction was pointed out 8in the evidence of the informant which suggests that her fardbeyan version, subsequent statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were on the same lines as her evidence in Court. We must observe in this connection that we have been impressed by the way the informant stood by a rather lengthy cross- examination considering her rustic background which could be possible only when the witness gives a truthful account of the occurrence without any addition or embellishment. Not only the evidence of the informant but that of other witnesses including P.W. 2 Daisy kumari seems to consistent with their previous statements before the police though some omissions were pointed out in the cross-examination. 12. A significant aspect of the case is that the weapons used in the commission of the crime were carried by the informant to the police station immediately after the occurrence and they contained stains of blood. 12. A significant aspect of the case is that the weapons used in the commission of the crime were carried by the informant to the police station immediately after the occurrence and they contained stains of blood. A doubt was sought to be created about the informant carrying only a part of the sword leaving behind the remaining piece at the place of occurrence but this was explained by P.W.4 who stated that considering the mental state of the informant the other piece must have been left behind as she wanted to reach the police station without wasting any time. It was submitted that there is no evidence as to whether the stains of blood found on the weapons were those of the deceased or even human blood. After the weapons were seized by the police they were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory; but from the record it in not clear that as to whether the report was received from the Laboratory or not. This in our opinion is of little consequence. If the investigating agency does not follow up the case by getting the report of the forensic test, it may not be a ground to disbelieve the prosecution case. It is to be kept in mind that the other part of the broken sword was found at the place of occurrence which too contained stains of blood. As a matter of fact, the clothes put on by the appellant, also contained blood stains which were removed from his body and seized in presence of the witnesses. 13. A doubt was sought to be raised as to place where the fardbayan was recorded, with reference to pare 14 of the evidence of P.W 4 it was submitted that the fardbeyan was recorded at the place of occurrence and not at the police station as mentioned in the body of the fardbeyan which creates doubt about veracity of the case itself. The submission is totally misconceived. From the case diary it appears that after the investigation was assigned to P.W.8 he left for the place of occurrence at 7.45 a.M. reaching there at 8.15 A.M. It was then that he recorded the further- statement of the informant. In other words while the fardbeyan was recorded by P.W7 Aditya Prasad at the police station, her further statement was recorded at the place of occurrence by p.w.8 Deepak Lal. In other words while the fardbeyan was recorded by P.W7 Aditya Prasad at the police station, her further statement was recorded at the place of occurrence by p.w.8 Deepak Lal. This is what P.W 4 meant to say in paragraph 4 of his evidence. It may be mentioned that P.W4 himself categorically stated earlier in his evidence that the fardbeyan was recorded at the police station. P.W. 7, the Officer-in-charge, who had recorded the fardbeyan also stated the same thing, amongst others. 14. It was finally submitted that the only circumstance on which the appellant has been implicated in the case is allegedly seer fleeing, away from the place of occurrence which cannot be said to be conclusive. It was submitted that as there is no eye witness to the occurrence the case is one of circumstantial evidence and it is well settled that unless the different circumstances complete the chain the guilt of the accused cannot be said to be established. We do not think that the only circumstance which proves the appellant's involvement in the crime is that he was seen at the place of occurrence fleeing away. Apart from that there are other circumstances which stand proved in the case. It is proved that there was animosity between the appellant and the deceased. The appellant somehow believed that the deceased had misappropriated the money and utilised the same for purchasing the house which had added to animosity. The appellant had taken a vow to kill the deceased. He had grown beard and hair declaring that until the deceased is killed he would not shave. He was seen at the place of occurrence at an unearthly hour coming down from the upper storey of Dalan where the deceased was killed. Soon thereafter he was apprehended and when brought to the police station his clothes were found to blood stained. The appellant was subjected to lengthy examination under Section 313 of the code of Criminal procedure. He was specifically asked about his blood stained clothes to which he did not give any answer. The blood stained clothes having been recovered from his person by the Officer-in-charge in presence of the independent witnesses who put their signatures on the seizure list, the appellant was supposed to give an explanation. His silence in this regard too has to be treated as a circumstance. 15. The blood stained clothes having been recovered from his person by the Officer-in-charge in presence of the independent witnesses who put their signatures on the seizure list, the appellant was supposed to give an explanation. His silence in this regard too has to be treated as a circumstance. 15. As a proposition of law unless the chain of circumstances is complete no conclusion as to the killing of the accused can be reached. However, the length of the chain (of circumstances) would depend upon the facts of the case. In a particular case proof of many circumstances may not complete the chain. In another case proof of only few circumstance may complete the chain. In the instant case the appellant had developed strong dislike for the deceased which apparently provided him the motive to kill him. The fact that he was seen climbing down on the stairs at the place of occurrence immediately prior to the recovery of the dead body only suggests that the appellant had come there to accomplice his intention. 16. From the trend of cross-examination it appears that the appellant wanted to take the defence of unsoundness of mind. Under Section 84 of the Indian Penal 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. However, the question of unsoundness of mind is question of fact and the same is required to be proved by evidence by the accused. In the instant case there is no evidence to suggest that the appellant was suffering from unsoundness of mind particularly at the time when the occurrence took place. Even as per the suggestions, his belief that his brother betrayed him might have created a feeling of depression but that cannot be understood as unsoundness of mind. As a matter of fact, the circumstances rather suggest that the crime was committed in pre-planned manner as the appellant felt jealous with the deceased. The deceased was in employment and from his salary he had been able to purchase a house which apparently gave rise to sense of frustration for the appellant. As a matter of fact, the circumstances rather suggest that the crime was committed in pre-planned manner as the appellant felt jealous with the deceased. The deceased was in employment and from his salary he had been able to purchase a house which apparently gave rise to sense of frustration for the appellant. His belief that the house was purchased by the deceased from the money which allegedly belonged also the appellant is a different matter. 17. In the facts and circumstances, we considered the question as to whether the case could be brought within the purview of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code but as one of the exceptions contained in Section 300 of the Penal Code is attracted, the provisions of Section 304 cannot be applied for awarding a lesser sentence. 18. We are satisfied that the prosecution have been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt and thus the judgment of conviction does not warrant any interference by this Court. The appeal is therefore, dismissed. The appellant is in custody. He will serve the remainder of the sentences in accordance with law. 19. Shri Vijay Kumar who has appeared Amicus Curiae and assisted the Court will be paid his fee by the Patna high Court Legal Aid committee. Let the first and the last pages of the judgment be handed over to him to facilitate payment of fees.