Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 158 (JHR)

State of Jharkhand v. Madras Nayak

2003-01-31

LAKSHMAN URAON, VISHNUDEO NARAYAN

body2003
JUDGMENT Vishnudeo Narayan, J.-Death Reference No. 2 of 2002 under section 366 Cr.P.C. and Criminal Appeal aforesaid preferred by the appellant named above arise from the impugned judgment dated 11.9.2002 passed in S.T. No. 501 of 19961 T.R. No. 19 of 2002 by Sri Vijay Narayan Singh, Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Fast Track Court, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder appellant has been found guilty for the offence punishable under sections 302 and 307 I.P.C. and he was sentenced to death for the offence under section 302 I.P.C. The appellant was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under section 307 LP.C. However, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of Fardbeyan (Ext. 11) of P.W. 10. Dhirja Nayak, one of the injured in this case, recorded by A.S.L, O.R. Trivedi. Ole: Lapung P.S. on 2.3.1996 at 22.15 hours in Village Karum regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place between 5.30 P.M. and 6.15 P.M. in Village Karum P.S. Lapung, District Ranchi. The case was instituted as per the formal F.I.R (Ext.10) on 3.3.1996 at 12.30 hours on the basis of the Fardbeyan aforesaid and the formal F.I.R. along with Fardbeyan was received in the court of C.J.M., Ranchi on 4.3.1996. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that P.W. 10, the informant was in his house at 5.30 P.M. when he heard alarms emanating towards the house of appellant Madras Nayak and he came out of his house and P.W. 11, Mati Ram Sahu came there raising alarms and told him that the appellant has committed the murder of his wife and children assaulting them by Tangi and the said appellant is coming to this side and asked him to flee away. It is alleged that the informant started fleeing away towards his courtyard of his house but in the meantime the appellant came inside his courtyard armed with blood stained Tangi (axe) and seeing the appellant, his wife Sannu Devi fled away from the courtyard and the appellant chased her from the courtyard of the informant and caught Sannu Devi in the Bari of Neema Horo and assaulted on her neck by the axe. It is alleged that seeing the assault on his wife Sannu Devi the informant rushed there to save her and at this the appellant gave a blow on the head of the informant as a result of which he fell down and thereafter the appellant gave further blows on his person which caused injury below his left eye and thereafter the appellant hurriedly came out from that place. It is alleged that the informant went to his wife and found her dead smeared with blood. It is also alleged that the informant came out of Bari aforesaid raising alarms and he saw the appellant chasing Budhu Sahu and gave a blow from his Tang; on the neck of Budhu Sahu as a result of which the said Budhu Sahu cried and fell in a well nearby. The prosecution case further is that the appellant saw Ugani Devi, the widow of Ram Lakhan Sah, going towards her house and he chased her and gave a Tangi blow on her face and when she fell down he dragged her inside his house and thereafter cry of Ugni Devi was heard coming from inside the said house. It is further alleged that the appellant thereafter again came out from his house armed with Dabli and he entered into the house of Mohar Pradhan which is situated in the west in front of his house and the female inmates of his house fled away raising alarms and the appellant assaulted an old blind lady Sukrmani Devi, who was sitting at the door of the house of Mohar Pradhan and committed her murder by Dabli. The prosecution case further is that the appellant ran from the house of Mohar Pradhan and entered into the house of Jagarnath Nayak from where the cry of Belly Nayak was heard which is to the effect that she and her daughter have been assaulted. It is also alleged that thereafter seeing P.W. 12, Kishun Singh coming from Champadih, the appellant ran towards him and assaulted him and Kishun Singh fell down being injured and from there the appellant entered into the house of Neel Kamal Sahu (P.W. 3) from where the cry of Neel Kamal Sahu was heard. The prosecution case further is that he has assaulted several persons chasing them on the road and also entering into the house of some other persons. The prosecution case further is that he has assaulted several persons chasing them on the road and also entering into the house of some other persons. A large numbor of persons, namely, Chamra Munda, Umesh Sahu, Ram Pradhan, Sudarshan Munda etc. of the village came to the place of occurrence on the alarms and they saw the occurrence and they also attempted to apprehend the appellant and thereafter the appellant threw the Dabli and fled away from the village. It is also alleged that thereafter the informant along with the villagers went to the house of the appellant where they found Sugni Devi, Vinod Nayak and Chermy Nayak i.e., the wife, son and daughter. respectively of appellant dead smeared with blood. It is also alleged that a hunt was made by the informant along with others but the appellant was not found and thereafter they went to Kakuria Police Outpost where no police officials were found and in the meantime the police came to the village. Lastly it has been alleged that the appellant has no enmity with any person of the village and he is not in a position to tell as to why the appellant has committed the murder of seven persons, namely, Sugni Devi, Vi nod Nayak, Chermy Nayak, Ugani Devi, Budhu Sahu, Sannu Devi and Sukrmani Devi and has injured Asha Kumari, Belly Nayak, Mati Ram Sahu, Premjit Nayak, Kishun Singh, Neel Kamal Sahu besides him. 4. The appellant has pleaded not guilty to the charges levelled against him and he claimed himself to be innocent and to have committed no offence. It has also been contended, inter alia, that the appellant was insane at the time of the occurrence and, as such, 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 as per the provisions contained under section 84 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. The prosecution has, in all, examined 17 witnesses to substantiate the charges levelled against the appellant. P.W. 10, Dhirja Nayak is the injured informant of this case and he is the husband of Sannu Devi, one of the deceased in this case. 5. The prosecution has, in all, examined 17 witnesses to substantiate the charges levelled against the appellant. P.W. 10, Dhirja Nayak is the injured informant of this case and he is the husband of Sannu Devi, one of the deceased in this case. P.W. 1, Manjani Devi and P.W. 4, Sahadeo Sahu are the parents of Budhu Sahu, the other deceased of this case. The third deceased of this case Ugani Devi is the mother of P.W. 4. P.W. 5, Sukan Pradhan is the son of Sukrmani Devi, the fatal victim in this case but he is a hearsay witness. P.W. 2, Kunti Devi, P.W. 12, Kishun Singh, P.W. 3, Neel Kamal Sahu, P.W. 11, Malti Ram Sahu are the eye witnesses of the occurrence in question and they have also sustained injuries on their person in the occurrence. P.W. 13, Umesh Sahu, P.W. 14, Sudarshan Munda and P.W. 15, Chamra Munda are the hearsay witnesses of the occurrence in question. P.W. 6, Amrit Horo is a witness on the inquest reports and his signature is 1/1 on inquest report (Ext. 13). P.W. 17, Bhadru Nayak is the father of the appellant and he is a hearsay witness regarding the occurrence in question. P.W. 7, Dr. Ajit Kumar Choudhary has conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Sugni Devi, Vinod Nayak, Chermy Nayak, wife, son and daughter respectively of the appellant, Sannu Devi, wife of RW. 10, the informant, Budhu Sahu, son of P.Ws. 1 and 4, Ugani Devi, mother of P.W. 4 and Sukrmani Devi, mother of P.W. 5 and the post morim report in respect thereof are Exts. 2 to 8 and signature of P.W. 7 thereon are 2/1, 3/1, 4/1, 51 1, 6/1, 7/1 and 8/1 respectively. Ext. 13 series are the inquest reports regarding the aforesaid seven deceased persons. P.W. 8, Dr. Shyam Sunder Sidhan has examined injuries found on the person of P.W. 10, the informant, P.W. 2, Kunti Nayak @ Belly Nayak besides her one year old daughter Asha Kumari, P.W. 12, Kishun Singh, P.W. 3, Neel Kamal Sahu and P.W. 11, Mati Ram Sahu, besides, one Premjit Nayak, the son of the appellant and these injury reports per his pen are Ext. 9 series. P.W. 9 is one of the I.O. in this case and he has submitted only the charge sheet in this case. 9 series. P.W. 9 is one of the I.O. in this case and he has submitted only the charge sheet in this case. It is pertinent to mention here that the I.O., who has conducted the investigation, has not taken oath in this case. P.W. 16, Deo Narayan Hanshda, S.1. of Police, is a formal witness, who has proved the formal F.I.R. (Ext. 10) and the endorsement on the Fardbeyan (Ext. 11) regarding the institution of this case, the seizure list (Ext. 12) and the inquest reports (Ext. 13 series). D.W. 1, Dr. N.P. Singh has been examined as a defence witness and he has proved letter no. 1157 dated 3.4.2002 of the Superintendent of Jail, which is Ext. A in this case. One Daniel Dinesh Mitra has been examined on behalf of defence or) the point of sentence. 6. In view of the oral and documentary evidence on the record the learned court below found the appellant named above guilty of the charges levelled against him and he was convicted and sentenced as stated above. 7. Assailing the impugned judgment as unsustainable and against the evidence on the record it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned court below has totally over looked the material infirmities patent on the face of the record and has gravely erred in coming to the finding of the guilt of the appellant. It has also been submitted that in a murder trial the appellant stands the risk of being subjected to the highest penalty prescribed by the I.P.C. and naturally the judicial approach in dealing with such cases has to be cautious, circumspect and careful and in dealing with such appeals and reference proceedings where the question of confirming a death sentence is involved the Court has to deal with the matter carefully and to examine all relevant and material circumstances before upholding the conviction and confirming the sentence of death and all arguments urged by the appellant and all material infirmities pressed before the Court on his behalf must be scrupulously examined and considered before a final decision is reached. In support of his contention a reference has been made of the case of Masalti and Ors. VS. State of Uttar Pradesh ( AIR 1965 SC 202 ) and also the case of Arjun Marik VS. State of Bihar [1994 (Suppl.) (2) SCC 372]. In support of his contention a reference has been made of the case of Masalti and Ors. VS. State of Uttar Pradesh ( AIR 1965 SC 202 ) and also the case of Arjun Marik VS. State of Bihar [1994 (Suppl.) (2) SCC 372]. It has been submitted further that the appellant was insane prior to the occurrence and he has undergone treatment for his insanity and lunacy in course of his confinement in the Birsa Munda Central Jail, Ranchi and also by RINPAS and also on the date and time of the occurrence he was insane and of unsound mind which is evident from the materials on the record as well as the manner of the occurrence. Elucidating further it has been submitted that the appellant had no apparent motive for commission of the murder of seven persons and injuring seven other persons in the alleged occurrence as he had no grudge, annoyance or enmity with them and there was also no provocation on the part of the deceased or the injured persons for the commission of the crime by the appellant as alleged. It has also been submitted that there is total absence of mens rea on the part of the appellant in the occurrence in question and the assault on the deceased as well as on the injured persons of this case is without any pre-meditation, cool consideration and planning and, there is also no gain at all to the appellant in commission of the offence in question and all these circumstances emanating from the evidence on the record clearly establish the fact that the appellant was a person of unsound mind suffering from insanity and by reasons of unsoundness of mind he was totally incapable of knowing the nature of his act and he was equally incapable of knowing that he was doing what is either wrong or contrary to law and in this view of the matter the commission of the murder of the- seven persons and injury caused to other seven persons as alleged by the prosecution by this appellant does not fall at all in the category of an offence and the actions of the appellant being of unsound of mind sufferirg from insanity and lunacy is protected under section 84 read with section 6 of the I.P.C. It has also been submitted that the appellant has not taken the plea of insanity in his defence and has also not brought evidence on the record to discharge the burden on him to prove his insanity at the time of occurrence as per sections 105 and 106 of the Evidence Act except Ext. A, the letter no. 1157 dated 13.4.02 read with the evidence of D.W. 1, Dr. N.P. Singh and one defence witness Daniel Dinesh Mitra on the point of sentence in respect thereof but the evidence of the prosecution on the record had discharged the burden on behalf of the appellant to prove his unsoundness of mind, insanity and lunacy. It has also been submitted that this appellant in the course of the occurrence due to unsoundness of mind and insanity has not only assaulted the deceased and other injured persons but has also killed the cattle which came in his way. It has also been submitted that this appellant in the course of the occurrence due to unsoundness of mind and insanity has not only assaulted the deceased and other injured persons but has also killed the cattle which came in his way. In support of his contention reliance has been placed upon the case of Dahyabhai Chhaganbhai Thakkar vs. State of Gujarat ( AIR 1964 SC 1563 ) and it has been submitted that when a plea of legal insanity is set up or it emerges on the basis of the evidence of the prosecution on the record, the Court has to consider whether at the time of commission of the offence the accused, by reason of unsoundness of mind, was incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law and the crucial point of time for ascertaining the state of mind of the appellant is the time when the offence was committed and whether the appellant was in such a state of mind as to be entitled to the benefit of section 84 of the Indian Penal Code can only be established from the circumstances which preceded, attended and followed the crime and the entire conduct of the appellant from the time of the occurrence up to the time of his trial commenced has to be assessed to come to the conclusion whether he was suffering from insanity and unsoundness of mind when he has committed the occurrence. Elucidating further it has been submitted that it is the, fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent and, therefore, the burden lies on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution, therefore, in a case of homicide shall prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused death with requisite intention described in section 299 of the I.P.C. This general burden never shifts and it always rests on the prosecution. But, under Section 105 of the Evidence Act the burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within the exception lies on the accused; and the court shall presume the absence of such circumstances. But, under Section 105 of the Evidence Act the burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within the exception lies on the accused; and the court shall presume the absence of such circumstances. Under Section 105 of the Evidence Act, read with the definition of "shall presume" in Section 4 thereof, the Court shall regard the absence of such circumstances as proved unless, after considering the matters before it, it believes that the said circumstances existed or their existence was so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that they did exist. To put it in other words, the accused will have to rebut the presumption that such circumstances did not exist, by placing material before the Court sufficient to make it consider the existence of the said circumstances so probable that a prudent man would act upon them. The accused has to satisfy the standard of, a "prudent man", If the material placed before the Court, such as, oral and documentary evidence, presumptions, admissions or even the prosecution evidence, satisfies the test d "prudent man", the accused will have discharged his burden. The evidence so placed may not be sufficient to discharge the burden under Section 105 of the Evidence Act, but it may raise a reasonable doubt in the mind of a Court as regards one or other of the necessary ingredients of the offence itself. It may, for instance, raise a reasonable doubt in the mind of the Court, whether the accused had the requisite intention laid down in Section 299 of the Penal Code. If the Court has such reasonable doubt, he has to acquit the accused, for in that event the prosecution will have failed to prove conclusively the guilt of the accused. The doctrine of burden of proof in the context of the plea of insanity may be stated in the following propositions : (1) The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had committed the offence with the requisite mens rea; and burden of proving that always rests on the prosecution from the beginning to end of the trial. The doctrine of burden of proof in the context of the plea of insanity may be stated in the following propositions : (1) The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had committed the offence with the requisite mens rea; and burden of proving that always rests on the prosecution from the beginning to end of the trial. (2) There is a rebuttable presumption that the accused was not insane, when he committed the crime, in the sense laid down by Section 84 of the Penal Code : the accused may rebut it by placing before the court all the relevant evidence-oral, documentary or circumstantial, but the burden of proof upon him is no higher than that rests upon a party to civil proceedings; (3) Even if the accused was not able to establish conclusively that he was insane at the time he committed the offence, the evidence placed before the court by the accused or by the prosecution may raise a reasonable doubt in the mind of the court as regards one or more of the ingredients of the offence, including mens rea of the accused and in that case the court would be entitled to acquit the accused on the ground that the general burden of proof resting on the prosecution was not discharged. Further reliance in this connection has been placed upon a case of Namu Ram Bora vs. State of Assam and Nagaland ( AIR 1975 SC 762 ) and case of Mitha vs. Emperor (AIR 1933 Lahore 123). In this connection learned counsel for the appellant has referred the evidence of P.W. 6. Amrit Horo and P.W. 17, Bhadru Nayak, the father of the appellant read with Ext. A. It has been submitted that P.W. 6 in para 2 of his crossexamination has deposed that the appellant was suffering from insanity and unsoundness of mind at the time of the occurrence and prior to that he was all right. P.W. 17 has deposed that the appellant had suffered from insanity prior to the occurrence and thereafter he used to suffer with insanity and unsoundness of mind intermittently and due to poverty he could not provide proper treatment to appellant regarding his insanity. However, at the time' of the occurrence his mental condition was perfectly sound. P.W. 17 has deposed that the appellant had suffered from insanity prior to the occurrence and thereafter he used to suffer with insanity and unsoundness of mind intermittently and due to poverty he could not provide proper treatment to appellant regarding his insanity. However, at the time' of the occurrence his mental condition was perfectly sound. It has also been submitted that the later part of the evidence of P.W. 17 that at the time of the occurrence the appellant was of sound mind is palpably false and incorrect in view of the fact that he was not present in his house at the time of the occurrence as he has gone with his cattle for grazing and after hearing the occurrence he has fled towards the jungle. It has also been submitted that P.Ws. 1 and 2 have falsely stated regarding the appellant being of sound mind at the time of the occurrence due to pressure tactics as a result of the meeting to get the appellant convicted as he has caused murder of seven persons and also injured several other persons. P.Ws. 1, 10 and 11 have also deposed that the appellant had no enmity, grudges or annoyance with any of the deceased or injured persons of the deceased and' there is also no motive to assault them and the appellant abruptly started assaulting the person who met him in the way including his wife and three children inside his house and the very conduct of appellant read with the manner of the occurrence leads .to the only irresistible conclusion that the act of the appellant is nothing but of an insane person. It has also been submitted that it would appear from Ext. A read with its annexure that the appellant was remanded to custody on 4.3.1996 and he was admitted in the Jail Hospital on 7.3.1996 as he was suffering from insanity and unsoundness of mind and thereafter he was sent to Ranchi Mental Asylum on 21.1.1997 for his specialized treatment from where he returned to the Jail on 20.3.1997 after treatment. A read with its annexure that the appellant was remanded to custody on 4.3.1996 and he was admitted in the Jail Hospital on 7.3.1996 as he was suffering from insanity and unsoundness of mind and thereafter he was sent to Ranchi Mental Asylum on 21.1.1997 for his specialized treatment from where he returned to the Jail on 20.3.1997 after treatment. It would further appear that again he was sent to RMA for specialized treatment on 27.12.1999 and from there he returned to the Jail on 1.9.2000 and his treatment is still going on as per direction of the RMA and further he is still undergoing treatment for his mental sickness on his examination by the doctor of RINPAS in the Jail Hospital fortnightly. In view of the evidence referred to above it appears that the appellant was insane at the time of the occurrence and Ext. A makes the defence version of the appellant probable that his act due to his unsoundness of mind is not an offence and he is protected under section 84 of the I.P.C. Lastly it has been contended that the learned court below did not meticulously consider the evidence on the record in right perspective and has gravely erred in coming to the finding of the guilt of the appellant awarding him , capital sentence though it is not a case rarest of the rare in the facts and circumstances of the record for the award of capital punishment as per ratio of the case d Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab [ (1980) 2 SCC 684 ] read with the case of Muniappan vs. State of Tamil Nadu ( AIR 1981 SC 1220 ), Machhi Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab [ (1983) 3 SCC 470 ] as well as Dalbir Singh & Ors. VS. State of Punjab ( AIR 1979 SC 1384 ) and Manik Mukherjee VS. State of Bihar (2000 CRI. LJ 3661). 8. The learned A.P.P. has submitted that there is no cogent, legal and reliable evidence on the record to prove the fact that appellant was suffering from unsoundness of mind and he was insane at the time of the occurrence rather as per evidence of his father (P.W. 17) he was not at all suffering from unsoundness of mind at the relevant time of the occurrence. It has also been submitted that even in the bail application of this appellant filed before the learned court below for the first time there is no averment regarding the appellant suffering from unsoundness of mind and insanity and defence of insanity and unsoundness of mind taken during the course of the trial is nothing but an after thought. It has also been contended that Ext. A does not even, prima facie, establish the fact that the appellant was suffering from unsoundness of mind at the relevant time of the occurrence. It has also been submitted that the finding of the learned court below on observation of the appellant during his trial is to the effect that the appellant is not insane and, as such, the appellant has not discharged his burden under sections 105 and 106 of the Evidence Act to prove his insanity and unsoundness of mind at the relevant time of the occurrence to have the benefit of section 84 of the I.P.C. Lastly it has been submitted that this is a case rarest of the rare in which seven persons have been done to death for no rhyme and reason and seven persons have been seriously injured including a one year child and in the list of the murdered persons there are three children of tender age besides his wife and an old blind infirm lady and in that facts and circumstances of this case the offence committed by the appellant requires extreme penalty and the learned court below has rightly awarded capital punishment to the appellant. 9. It will admit of no doubt that an occurrence has taken place between 5.30 P.M. to 6.15 P.M. on 2.3.1996 in village Karum, P.S. Lapung, District Ranchi in which seven persons, namely, Sugni Devi, Vi nod Nayak, Chermy Nayak, Ugani Devi, Budhu Sahu, Sannu Devi and Sukrmani Devi have been done to death either by axe or Dabli and besides that Asha Kumari, Kunti Nayak @ Belly Nayak, Mati Ram Sahu, Premjit Nayak, Kishun Singh, Neel Kamal Sahu and the informant Dhirja Nayak have sustained injuries on their person by axe or Dabli and the Fardbeyan (Ext. 11) of the informant came into existence within four hours of the occurrence at about 22.15 hours on 2.3.1996 at the place of the occurrence in Village Karum by A.S.I. O.R. Trivedi and the seven injured persons were sent to the Primary Health Centre, Bero for medical treatment. All the injured persons, namely, P.W.2, Kunti Devi and her daughter Asha Kumari, P.W. 3, Neel Kamal Sahu, P.W. 11, Mati Ram Sahu, P.W. 10, Dhirja Nayak, Premjit Nayak and P.W. 12, Kishun Singh were examined by P.W. 8, Dr. Shyam Sunder Sidhan in the Bero State Dispensary at 2.10, 2.15, 2.20, 2.25 and 2.30, 10.00 and 10.05 hours on 3.3.1996 respectively and the injury reports in respect thereof are Exts. 9/4, 9/6, 9/7, 9/3, 9/2 and 9/5 respectively. P.W. 8 has further deposed to have found on the person of P.W. 2, Kunti Devi one incised wound 4" x 1" x bone deep cutting the rames of mandible on right cheek extending from above the right eye brow to the right lower cheek. The medical witness has deposed that the nature of the said injury was grievous caused by heavy cutting weapon and the age of injury is within 12 hours. The medical witness has further deposed to have examined Asha Kumari, the infant daughter of P.W. 2, Kunti Devi and has found an incised wound 2 1/4" x 1/4" x bone deep cutting the frontal bone of the left side of the front of the head, the nature of which is grievous caused by heavy sharp cutting weapon. According to the medical witness the age of this injury is within 12 hours. The medical witness has also deposed to have examined P.W. 3, Neel Kamal Sahu and has found one incised wound 1/2" x 1/4" x skin deep above the right eye brow, the nature of which is simple caused by sharp cutting weapon besides an abrasion 1/2" x 1/4" on the right knee and the nature of injury is simple caused by hard and blunt substance. The medical witness has also deposed that the age of the injury on the person of P.W. 3 is within 12 hours. The medical witness has also deposed that the age of the injury on the person of P.W. 3 is within 12 hours. The medical witness has deposed to have found on the person of P.W. 11, Mati Ram Sahu abrasion 1/4" x 1/4" on the medial side of the right palm, the nature of which is simple caused by hard and blunt substance and the age of injury is within 12 hours. P.W. 8, the medical witness has further deposed to have examined P.W. 10 Dhirja Nayak, the informant and has found the following injuries on his person : (i) Incised wound 1/2" x 1/4" x skin deep on the lateral side of left eye brow. (ii) Incised wound 1/4" x 1/4" x skin deep on the left outer canthus. (iii) Incised wound 2" x 1/4" x skin deep on the cheek over the matter prominence. (iv) Abrasion of 2" x 1/4" x cross the middle of nose. (v) Two abrasions of 1/4" x 1/2" each on the lower part of right fore arms. According to the medical witness all the injuries are simple in nature but injury nos. (i) to (iii) are caused by sharp cutting weapon whereas the other two injuries have been caused by hard and blunt substance and the age of the injuries is within 12 hours. P.W. 8 has also examined Premjit Nayak, son of the appellant and has found one incised wound 3" x 1 1/2" X 1/4" on the middle part of the right forearm, the nature of which is simple caused by sharp cutting weapon and the age of injuries is within 24 hours. P.W. 8 has also further deposed to have examined P.W.' 12, Kishun Singh and has found the following injuries on his person : (i) One incised wound 2" x 1" x skin deep on the middle head. (ii) Incised wound 2" x 1/4" x skin deep on the front of forehead. (Hi) Incised wound 1/2" x 1/4" x skin deep on the lower part of right cheek. (iv) Incised wound 2" x 1/4" x skin deep above the left eye. (v) Incised wound 1/2" x 1/4" x skin deep on the left lower eye lid. According to the medical witness all the injuries aforesaid have been caused by sharp cutting weapon, the age of which is within 24 hours. (iv) Incised wound 2" x 1/4" x skin deep above the left eye. (v) Incised wound 1/2" x 1/4" x skin deep on the left lower eye lid. According to the medical witness all the injuries aforesaid have been caused by sharp cutting weapon, the age of which is within 24 hours. It is pertinent to mention here that injuries appearing on the persons, namely, P.W. 2, Kunti Devi, Asha Kumari, P.W. 3, Neel Kamal Sahu, P.W. 11, Mati Ram Sahu, P.W. 10, Dhirja Nayak were examined between 2.10 hours and 2.30 hours in the very night of the occurrence and, as such, the medical witness has opined the age of their injuries within 12 hours whereas the injury appearing on the person of Premjit Nayak and P.W. 12, Kishun Singh were examined between 10.00 hours and 10.05 hours on 3.6.1996 and, as such, the medical witness has opined the age of their injuries within 24 hours. The age of injury as opined by the medical witness in respect of the injured persons aforesaid is in conformity with the time of the occurrence as alleged in the Fardbeyan (Ext. 11), of the informant. 10. Inquest reports in respect of Vinod Nayak aged about four years and Sugni Devi, the son and wife of the appellant and Ugani Davi were prepared on 3.3.1996 at 6.00 hours inside the thatched house built of clay of the appellant whereas the inquest report of Chermy Nayak @ Permi Nayak aged about five years, the daughter of the appellant, has been prepared at the very time adjacent north of the house of the appellant. The inquest report of Sannu Devi, deceased, the wife of P.W. 10, the informant was prepared in the Bari of Neemo Horo in front of the house of informant Dhirja Nayak on 3.3.1996 at 6.00 hours. The dead body of Budhu Sahu, deceased, aged about six years was found in the dry well of Kamal Sahu and his inquest report was prepared there on 3.3.1996 at 6.00 hours. The inquest report of Sukrmani Devi was prepared in the thatched house of Mohar Pradhan where her dead body was found. It has specifically been mentioned in the inquest reports (Ext. 13 series) that there were incised wounds on the persons of all the deceased caused by sharp cutting weapon on the vital part of their body. The inquest report of Sukrmani Devi was prepared in the thatched house of Mohar Pradhan where her dead body was found. It has specifically been mentioned in the inquest reports (Ext. 13 series) that there were incised wounds on the persons of all the deceased caused by sharp cutting weapon on the vital part of their body. P.W. 7 has deposed to have conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Vinod Nayak, Budhu Sahu, Sugni Devi, Sannu Devi, Ugani Devi, Permy @ Chermy Nayak and Sukrmani Devi between 15.00 hours and 18.00 hours on 3.3.1996. P.Ww. 7 has deposed to have found the following ante mortem injuries on the dead body of Vinod Nayak, the son of the appellant : (i) Incised wound 5 x 3 cm x bone deep over left fronto temporal bones cutting the frontal and temporal bones. Brain matter and presence of blood and blood clots over left hemi-sphere of brain were found. (ii) Incised wound 5 x 2 cm x bone deep over the right chin cutting the right side of mandible completely. He has further deposed that the aforesaid injuries has been caused by heavy sharp cutting weapon and death of Vinod Nayak was due to the head injury and the time elapsed since death is between 12 to 36 hours from the time of the post mortem examination. Ext. 3/1 is the post mortem report per his pen in respect of Vinod Nayak, the deceased. 11. P.W. 7 has also deposed to have conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Budhu Sahu and has found the following ante mortem incised injuries on his person : (i) Incised wound 7 x 2 cm x bone deep on right side of neck cutting the• soft tissues blood vessels trachea oesophagus and seventh cervical vertebra completely. (ii) 4 x 1 cm x bone deep over right side of neck upper most part cutting the soft tissue blood vessels and neudible bone completely. (Hi) 3 x 2 cm x soft tissue over the right cheek. There is infiltration and blood and blood clots at the sight of the incised wound. (ii) 4 x 1 cm x bone deep over right side of neck upper most part cutting the soft tissue blood vessels and neudible bone completely. (Hi) 3 x 2 cm x soft tissue over the right cheek. There is infiltration and blood and blood clots at the sight of the incised wound. The medical witness has also deposed that all the injuries have been caused by sharp cutting weapon and the death of the deceased is due to the above mentioned injuries and the time elapsed since death is between 12 to 36 hours. Ext. 8, the post mortem report corroborates the testimony of the medical witness in respect thereof. 12. P.W. 7 has further deposed to have conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Sugni Devi, the wife of the appellant and has found the following ante mortem incised injuries : (i) 3 x 1 cm x bone deep over right side of foreheaa cutting the frontal bone partially. (H) 5 x 1 cm x bone deep over left side of forehead cutting the left frontal bone partially. (iii) 7 x 2 cm x bone deep over left occipital region of head cutting the soft tissue and left occipital bone partially. (iv) 7 x 2 cm x bone deep cutting the soft tissues and right mandible partially. (v) 4 x 2 cm x bone deep over front of neck cutting the soft tissue, blood vessels, trachea and oesophagus and fifth cervical vertebra completely. The medical witness has also deposed to have found presence of subdural blood and blood clots over both hemi-sphere of brain. According to the medical witness all the injuries aforesaid have been caused by sharp cutting weapon and death of the deceased is due to the above mentioned injuries and the time elapsed since death is between 12 to 36 hours. The post mortem report (Ext. 2) corroborates the testimony of the medical witness in respect thereof. 13. P.W. 7 has also deposed to have conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Sannu Devi, the wife of P.W. 10, Dhirja Nayak and has found the following ante mortem injuries on her dead body: (i) 7 x 2 cm x bone deep over left lateral neck cutting the soft tissue, blood vessels, trachea, oesophagus and fourth cervical vertebra completely. (ii) 6 x 2 cm x bone deep over left lateral neck, upper part cutting the soft tissue, blood vessels, trachea, oesophagus and third cervical vertebra completely. (iii) 4 x 2 cm x soft tissue over left occipital region of head. (iv) 7 x 1 cm x bone deep left tempo-parital region of head. (v) 6 x 2 cm x bone deep over top of right shoulder cutting the humerous bone partially. (vi) 9 x 6 cm x bone deep cutting the left scapula partially. (viii) 4 x 2 cm x salt tissues over front of right arm. There was presence of blood and blood clot at the right of injuries. The medical witness has further deposed that the aforesaid injuries have been caused by heavy sharp cutting weapon and the death of the deceased is due to the injuries over her neck and the time elapsed since death is between 12 to 36 hours. He has also deposed that the aforesaid injuries might have been caused by Tangi (axe). Ext. 6, the post mortem report corroborates the evidence of the medical witness. 14. P.W. 7 has also further deposed to have conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Ugani Devi and has found the following ante mortem incised injuries on her dead body : (i) 9 x 2 cm x bone deep over right cheek cutting the soft tissue and mandible bone completely. (ii) 9 x 3 cm x bone deep over the bridge of nose, cutting the soft tissues, nasal bone and the middle bone partially. (iii) 8 x 2 cm x bone deep over front of chin right side cutting the soft tissues and mandible bone completely. (iv) 6 x 2 cm x bone deep and 3 x 1 cm x bone deep over right side of forehead cutting the frontal bone and the brain matter. There was presence of blood and blood clots over the sight of incised wound and blood and blood clots over both hemisphere of brain. The medical witness has also deposed that the aforesaid injuries have been caused by heavy sharp cutting weapon may be Tang; and the death of the deceased is due to the head injuries associated with haemorrhage and shock and the time elapsed since death is 12 to 36 hours. Ext. 7, the post mortem report corroborates the testimony of the medical witness. 15. Ext. 7, the post mortem report corroborates the testimony of the medical witness. 15. The medical witness has also deposed to have conducted the post mortem of dead body of Chermy Nayak, five years old daughter of the appellant and to have found the following incised injuries : (i) 8 x 2 cm x bone deep over the back of neck cutting the fourth cervical vertebra completely. (ii) 4 x 2 cm x bone deep over left lateral neck, lower part cutting the blood vessels and 5th cervical vertebra completely. (iii) 7 x 2 cm x bone deep over occipital region of head cutting the occipital bone partially. (iv) 6 x 2 cm x bone deep over the lateral neck, upper part cutting the soft tissue, blood vessels and third cervical vertebra completely. The medical witness has further deposed to have found presence of blood and blood clots at the sight of the injuries aforesaid and subdural blood and blood clots over both hemi-sphere of the brain. According to the medical witness all the injuries aforesaid have been caused by heavy and sharp cutting weapon may be by Tangi and death of the deceased is due to the above mentioned injuries and the time elapsed since death is 12 to 36 hours. Ext. 4, the post mortem report supports the testimony of the medical witness in respect thereof. 16. P.W. 7 has lastly deposed to have conducted the post mortem examination of Sukrmani Devi at 18.00 hours on that very day and has found the following ante mortem incised injuries on her person : (i) 6 x 2 cm x bone deep over right side of neck, lower part cutting the soft tissues, blood vessels, trachea, oesophagus and seventh cervical vertebra completely. (ii) 5 x 2 cm x bone deep over front of neck left and lateral side cutting the soft tissues, blood vessels, trachea, oesophagus and six cervical vertebra completely. (iii) 7 x 2cm x soft tissue over right side of neck, upper part. There was presence of blood and blood clot at the side of injuries. The medical witness has deposed that all the aforesaid injuries have been caused by sharp cutting weapon may be by Tangi and death of the deceased is due to the injury appearing on his neck and the time elapsed since death is between 12 to 36 hours of the post mortem examination. The medical witness has deposed that all the aforesaid injuries have been caused by sharp cutting weapon may be by Tangi and death of the deceased is due to the injury appearing on his neck and the time elapsed since death is between 12 to 36 hours of the post mortem examination. Ext. 5, the post mortem report corroborates the testimony of the medical witness in respect thereof. 17. Let us now advert to the manner of the occurrence. According to the prosecution case P.W. 11, Mati Ram Sahu was at the house of the appellant having called on his father Bhadru Nayak (P.W. 17) where he was assaulted by the appellant by Tangi and he escaped from there raising alarms and told the informant that the appellant has committed the murder of his wife and children assaulting them by Tangi. P.W. 11, Mati Ram Sahu has deposed that on the day of occurrence P.W. 17, Bhadru Nayak had called him at his house for the treatment of his sick cow and he had gone there but he could not diagnose the disease from which his cow was suffering and Bhadru Nayak told him to stay there as he is going to call some other person in respect thereof. P.W. 11 has further deposed that he was waiting at the Verandah of the house of P.W. 17, Bhadru Nayak, who is the father of this appellant. He has also deposed that the appellant came out of his house armed with Tangi and attempted to assault him by Tangi and wielded Tangi blow on him and he caught both the hands of the appellant and pushed the appellant and fled away from there. His evidence is• further to the effect that he got injury on his left chest. P.W. 8, the medical witness has found an abrasion 1W' x 1/4" on the medial side of the right palm of P.W. 11. The medical witness has not found any injury on the chest of P.W. 11, as deposed by him. P.W. 11 has further deposed that he had fled away from there to his house and thereafter he learnt about the details of the occurrence on the following day. P.W. 11, however, does not depose to have met P.W. 10, the informant, and had cautioned him regarding the appellant. P.W. 11 has further deposed that he had fled away from there to his house and thereafter he learnt about the details of the occurrence on the following day. P.W. 11, however, does not depose to have met P.W. 10, the informant, and had cautioned him regarding the appellant. In para 4 he has specifically deposed that he has not seen any subsequent incident, which had taken place in the occurrence in question. P.W. 10, Dhirja Nayak, the informant, has deposed that the appellant was armed with a Tangi (axe) and he had committed the murder of his wife and two children by Tangi. His evidence is further to the effect that the appellant also assaulted him by axe causing injury by the side of his left eye, cheek and hand and has also bit him by teeth on his right hand when he had caught his axe. He has also deposed that the appellant has assaulted his wife, besides, Ugani Devi, Budhu Sahu, Sukrmani Devi causing their death and he has also assaulted Asha Kumari, Belly Nayak @ Kunti Nayak, Mati Ram Sahu, Premiit Nayak, Kishun Singh and Neel Kamal Sahu. He has also deposed that the appellant has committed the murder of his wife Sugani Devi and his children Vinod Nayak and Chermy Nayak in his house. He has also deposed that the appellant committed the murder of Budhu Sahu, the six years old son of Sahadeo Sahu, near the Akhara and after committing his murder he had thrown his dead body in the well and thereafter he has committed the murder of Ugani Devi and Sukrrnani Devi. In para 4 of his evidence he has deposed that the appellant has also assaulted the persons at the place where he met them and he used to enter in the house and after committing the murder inside the said house he used to come outside of tile house and thereafter he enters in other h use for committing the murder. He has specifically deposed that the appellant has assaulted seven persons including him and has committed the murder of other seven persons for no rhyme and reason. He has specifically deposed that the appellant has assaulted seven persons including him and has committed the murder of other seven persons for no rhyme and reason. P.W. 10 in para 4 has stated that the appellant had no animus or enmity against any person whom he has either assaulted or committed their murder and there was also no reason for the said assault as well as commission of the murder. The medical witness has found the injury on the person of the informant as deposed by him. It appears from the evidence on the record as deposed by P.W. 10, the informant, that he has no occasion to witness the commission of the murder of seven persons, who are the deceased in this case. In para 6 he has deposed that when he was returning after fishing he got the information about the occurrence and the moment he reached in the village he learnt from some children in his village that the appellant has committed the murder of his wife. In para 7 he has deposed that he has seen the appellant when the appellant assaulted him as he had concealed himself by the side of the wall at that time. His evidence is further to the effect that he became unconscious and he regained conscious in the hospital. P.W. 1, Manjani Devi and P.W. 4, Sahadeo Sahu are the mother and father respectively of Budhu Sahu, the deceased of this case and also the daughter-in-law and husband of Ugani Devi, the other deceased of this case. P.W. 1, has deposed that at the time of the occurrence she was cleaning the utensils and her six years old son Budhu Sahu was returning after getting his she-goat grazed and when he reached near the Pipal tree in front of his house, the appellant armed with Tangi chased Budhu Sahu and Budhu Sahu fell on the ground in course of chase near the Pipal tree and Madras Nayak assaulted Budhu Sahu by Tangi causing injury on his neck and caught him till he died and thereafter he threw Budhu Sahu in the nearby well. She has also deposed that she went to rescue her son and the appellant chased her to assault her and she fled away from there and out of fear. She has also deposed that she went to rescue her son and the appellant chased her to assault her and she fled away from there and out of fear. Her evidence is further to the effect that the appellant has committed the murder of her son without any reason. Her evidence is further to the effect that thereafter the appellant caused injury by axe on the head of Ugani Devi and committed her murder at the place where Budhu Sahu was done to death and after committing the murder of Ugani Devi he carried her to his house. It is relevant to mention here that the dead body of Budhu Sahu was found in the well and the dead body of Ugani Devi was found in the house of the appellant where their inquest reports were prepared. Lastly she has deposed that the appellant had no animus against her or her family. P.W. 4, Sahadeo Sahu in his evidence on oath has materially corroborated the testimony of P.W. 1, as deposed by her. P.W. 4 at the time of the occurrence was returning to his village from the place where he was cutting tree on getting information that the appellant is assaulting several persons of the village and committing their murder. In the concluding portion of his evidence he has deposed that the appellant has not only committed the murder of human being but the cattle, which he found in the village during the course of the occurrence. 18. According to the prosecution case, as averred in the Fardbeyan (Ext. 11) of P.W. 10, the informant, the appellant after committing the murder of Ugani Devi and carrying her dead body in his house again came out of his house and this time he was armed with Dabli and thereafter he entered in the house of Mohan Pradhan which is situated in front of his house in the west and the female inmates of the said house fled away raising alarms seeing him but an old, infirm• and blind Sukrmani Devi could not escape from there and the appellant assaulted her by Dabli causing her death. On this score we have the evidence of P.W. 10, the informant and P.W. 5, Sukan Pradhan, the• son of Sukrmani aforesaid. On this score we have the evidence of P.W. 10, the informant and P.W. 5, Sukan Pradhan, the• son of Sukrmani aforesaid. P.W. 10 has deposed in his evidence on oath that the appellant has committed the murder of Sukrmani, a blind woman, in her house. P.W. 5, the son of Sukrmani, has deposed that at the time of the occurrence he was at the place of his work and when he returned to his house at 6.00 O'clock in the evening he found the dead body of his mother Sukrmani. He has also deposed that his wife Dabyanti Devi informed him that the appellant has committed the murder of Sukrmani Devi. P.W. 5 is a hearsay witness. The inquest report of Sukrmani Devi was prepared by the I.O. in the house of Mohan Pradhan where her dead body was found having injury on her neck by sharp cutting weapon such as Dabli and P.W. 7, the medical witness, has corroborated the existence of three incised injuries on the neck of Sukrmani Devi as a result of which she had died. 19. According to the prosecution case, the appellant after committing the murder of Sukrmani Devi has entered into the house of Jagan Nayak and he has assaulted Belly Nayak @ Kunti Devi, wife of Jagan Nayak, and her one year old child Asha Kumari inside the said house. P.W. 10, the informant, has deposed that the appellant assaulted Belly Nayak @ Kunti Devi and her daughter Asha Kumari in her house. P.W. 2, Kunti Devi @ Belly Nayak has deposed that at about 6.00 O'clock in the evening on the day of the occurrence she was inside her house with her child Asha Kumari in her lap and the appellant entered into her house armed with a bloodstained Tangi and he gave a Tangi blow on her right cheek and also caused injury to her one year child by Tangi on her head and thereafter the appellant fled away from there. She has also deposed that her husband came on information given by his younger brother and thereafter she along with her daughter was treated. She has very specifically deposed that the appellant had no enmity with the co-villagers as well as with the injured persons and the deceased persons of this case. She has also deposed that her husband came on information given by his younger brother and thereafter she along with her daughter was treated. She has very specifically deposed that the appellant had no enmity with the co-villagers as well as with the injured persons and the deceased persons of this case. She has also deposed that there was also no quarrel between the appellant and the villagers immediately prior to the occurrence in question. P.W. 8, the medical witness, has deposed to have found one grievous incised wound 4" x 1" x bone deep cutting the rames of mandible on the right cheek of P.W. 2, Kunti Devi extending from above the right eye brow to the right lower cheek besides a grievous incised wound 2 1/4" X 1/4" x bone deep cutting the frontal bone on the left side of the front of the head on Asha Kumari, the infant daughter. The existence of the injury on P.W. 2, Kunti Devi and her infant child as found by the medical witness corroborates the manner of the assault on them by the appellant. According to the prosecution case the appellant thereafter assaulted Kishun Singh seeing him and he chased him and started assaulting him by Dabli. P.W. 10, the informant, has deposed regarding the assault on Kishun Singh by the appellant in the occurrence in question in his evidence on oath. P.W. 12, Kishun Singh has deposed that in the evening on the day of the occurrence the appellant has assaulted him by axe for no cause and without any rhyme or reason. He has also deposed that he was examined and treated by the physician. The medical witness has deposed to have found five incised wounds on the person P.W. 12, Kishun Singh caused by sharp cutting weapon. According to the prosecution case the appellant thereafter assaulted Neel Kamal Salu after entering into his house. P.W. 10, the informant, in his evidence on oath has deposed about the assault on P.W. 3, Neel Kamal Sahu by the appellant by Tangi after entering into his house causing injury on his head. According to the prosecution case the appellant thereafter assaulted Neel Kamal Salu after entering into his house. P.W. 10, the informant, in his evidence on oath has deposed about the assault on P.W. 3, Neel Kamal Sahu by the appellant by Tangi after entering into his house causing injury on his head. P.W. 3, Neel Kamal Sahu has deposed that at about 6.00 O'clock in the evening on the day of the occurrence he was sitting in his house, after getting his cattle grazed and the appellant entered into his house armed with blood-stained Tangi and gave a Tangi blow on his head. He has further deposed that he snatched the said Tangi from the appellant and thereafter the appellant hurriedly fled away from there. He has also deposed that the appellant has committed the murder of seven persons in the village in the said occurrence and has also caused injury to seven other persons. P.W. 8, the medical witness, has deposed to have found one simple incised wound 1/2" x 1/4" x skin deep above the right eye brow of P.W. 3, Neel Kamal Sahu besides an abrasion 1/2" x 1/4" on his right knee. P.W. 3 has further deposed that after snatching the axe from the appellant he fell down and it appears that an abrasion have been caused to him due to the said fall. The evidence of the medical witness regarding the existence of the incised injury over the right eye brow of Neel Kamal Sahu corroborates the testimony of P.W. 3 as deposed by him regarding the manner of the occurrence. P.W. 10 has further deposed in his evidence on oath that the appellant has committed the murder of his wife Sugni Devi, his son Vinod Nayak and daughter permy Nayak @ Chermy Nayak besides causing injury to his son Premjit Nayak in his own house. However, Premjit Nayak has not taken oath in this case, the reason for which is obvious. It is therefore evident from the evidence on the record referred to above that the appellant has committed the murder of seven persons and has further injured other seven persons in the occurrence which is said to have taken place between 5.30 P.M. to 6.15 P.M. and the evidence on the record clearly establishes the place of the occurrence in respect thereof. P.Ws. P.Ws. 1, 2, 10 and 11 have specifically deposed in their evidence on oath that the appellant had no enmity with the persons whom he has injured as well as whose death he has caused and none of the injured or the deceased has ever given him any provocation either prior to the occurrence or immediately soon before the occurrence. It has also come in the evidence of the aforesaid witnesses that the appellant has committed the murder of seven persons and also injured seven other persons for no rhyme or reason. P.W. 10 has specifically deposed in para 4 of his evidence that the appellant assaulted the persons in the village where he found them and whoever came in his front he was assaulted by the appellant. P.W. 10 has also deposed that the appellant used to enter into the house running where he used to assault the inmate of the house by Tangi and thereafter he immediately used to return from the house and used to enter into the house of other co-villagers and he assaulted the persons who met him in the way. P.W. 1 has deposed that the police apprehended the appellant in the village near the temple of Bajrang Bali. P.W. 10 has also deposed that the appellant was apprehended in the village but he does not know as to who has apprehended him after the occurrence. However, P.W. 12 and P.W. 5 have deposed that Dipti Singh and Ganga Mukhiya had apprehended the appellant in village Kakariya and had brought him to village• Karum. P.W. 4 and P.W. 11 have also deposed that the appellant has also killed ox and she-goat in the village which came in his way in the course of the occurrence. P.W. 10 in the concluding portion in para 5 of his testimony has deposed that the appellant as well as his wife Sugni Devi, one of the deceased of his case, were earning members of the family and they had separate earnings and also their mess and he does not know as to what was the cause for the commission of the murder of Sugni Devi besides her two children Vi nod Nayak and Permy Nayak inside her house and assault on her other son Premjit Nayak by the appellant. 20. 20. It is relevant to mention here that the following facts emerge from the evidence on the record referred to above : The appellant has no enmity at all existing and alive with the seven injured persons of this case whom he has assaulted as well as seven deceased persons of this case whose death he has caused and there is also no animus or motive for the assault of the seven persons aforesaid as well as for the commission of the murder of other persons of this case. No provocation has been caused to the appellant either by the deceased persons of this case or by the other seven persons who have sustained injuries in the occurrence in question. There is total absence of any planning by the appellant for the commission of the murder of seven persons as well as causing injury to other seven persons. The appellant in the facts and circumstances of this case is not to have any gain by committing the murder of seven persons and injuring other seven persons. The act of the appellant in committing the murder in question as well as assaulting the seven other persons is without pre-meditation and cool consideration. And last but not the least the appellant has not only committed the murder of seven persons and caused injury to other seven persons but he has also killed cattle, ox and she-goat which came in his way in the course of the occurrence. The aforesaid facts give inkling of the conduct, behaviour and mental condition of the appellant at the time of the commission of the occurrence in question. Now the question arises as to whether the conduct of the appellant at the time of the occurrence was that of a prudent man or otherwise and as to whether the murder of seven persons and injury caused to other seven persons are the acts of the appellant with criminal intent. 21. Let us now advert to the evidence on the record as to whether the appellant was suffering from insanity and unsoundness of mind at the time when he has committed the murder of seven persons and has also caused injuries to other seven persons. In this connection I will refer to the evidence of P.W. 17, Bhadru Nayak, the father of the appellant. In this connection I will refer to the evidence of P.W. 17, Bhadru Nayak, the father of the appellant. In the concluding portion of his examination-in-chief he has deposed that the appellant was not insane and he was quite mentally sound and alert at the time of the occurrence. However, in para 2 of his cross-examination he has deposed that once the appellant had suffered from unsoundness of mind and insanity prior to the occurrence and he could not be treated properly due to his poverty, He has also deposed that he used to suffer from insanity intermittently. He has also deposed that appellant has been implicated in this case thinking the appellant to be insane in view of the occurrence in question. P.W. 5 at page 3 of his testimony has deposed that appellant has stated that he has done nothing and he also knows nothing as to what has happened when he was apprehended by the villagers after the occurrence. The evidence of P.W. 5 referred to above gives an inkling of the fact that the appellant was definitely not of the sound mind when he was apprehended soon after the occurrence. P.W. 6 in the concluding portion of his testimony has categorically deposed that the appellant was suffering fro!"') unsoundness of mind and insanity at the time of the occurrence though prior to that he was quite sane. On the contrary P.W. 1 in para 2 at page 3 of her deposition has stated that she does not know as to whether appellant was insane at the time of the occurrence but in the next she has deposed that the appellant was quite sane and mentally sound at the time of the occurrence. P.W. 2 in concluding portion of her testimony has denied the suggestion given to her that the appellant was insane at the time of the occurrence and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to insanity. P.Ws. 3, 4 and P.W. 10, the informant, besides P.Ws. 11 and 12, however, do not whisper in their evidence on oath regarding the fact as to whether the appellant was insane or not at the time of the occurrence. Ext. A is the letter no. P.Ws. 3, 4 and P.W. 10, the informant, besides P.Ws. 11 and 12, however, do not whisper in their evidence on oath regarding the fact as to whether the appellant was insane or not at the time of the occurrence. Ext. A is the letter no. 1157 dated 3.4.2002 along with its annexure sent by the Superintendent, Birsa Munda Central Jail, Ranchi whereby the medical report of the appellant was sent to the learned court below on requisition. Ext. A reveals the following facts : The appellant was remanded to custody on 4.3.1996 and he was admitted in the jail hospital on 7.3.1996 when he was found to be mentally sick and suffering from unsoundness of mind. The appellant was sent for specialized treatment to A.M.A., Ranchi on 21.1.1997 from custody. It is relevant to mention here that a petition was filed on behalf of the appellant on 6.12.1996 before the learned court below that appellant is a man of unsound mind and he is in the treatment of jail hospital and it was prayed to refer him to the Ranchi Mental Hospital, Kanke for his treatment and the learned court below called for a report in respect thereof from the Superintendent of Jail, Ranchi after getting the appellant examined in Ranchi Mental Hospital, Kanke and in pursuance thereof the appellant was admitted in the Ranchi Mental Hospital on 21.1.1997 as stated above. Ext. A further shows that the appellant returned to the Central Jail, Ranchi from Ranchi Mental Hospital on 20.3.1997 after treatment with certain directions of his further treatment. It further appears from Ext. A that the appellant was again sent to A.M.A., Ranchi for specialized treatment on 27.12.1999 and he came back to the Central Jail from there after treatment on 1.9.2000 and since then his treatment is going on in the jail hospital in accordance with the direction of A.M.A., Ranchi where the doctor of the A.M.A., Ranchi examines the appellant fortnightly and his treatment is continuing as per direction of the doctor of A.M.A, Ranchi. The report annexed with Ext. A has been proved by D.W. 1, Dr. N.P. Singh, CAS., Central Jail, Ranchi. The report annexed with Ext. A has been proved by D.W. 1, Dr. N.P. Singh, CAS., Central Jail, Ranchi. One defence witness, namely, Daniel Dinesh Mitra, Jailor, Birsa Munda Central Jail, Ranchi has also been examined on the point of sentence and in his evidence he has deposed that the appellant was sent for treatment in the Mental Hospital, Kanke and he is still undergoing treatment in the jail hospital as per direction of the doctor of Ranchi Mental Hospital and the doctor of the Ranchi Mental Hospital always visits the jail for his treatment. He has further deposed that since 2001 the behaviour of the appellant has become quite normal. However, the forwarding letter dated 4.3.1996 for remanding the appellant in jail custody and the order sheet dated 4.3.1996 of the learned C.J.M., Ranchi before whom the appellant was produced in custody for remand do not even whisper about the mental state or unsoundness of mind or insanity of the appellant. But Ext. A shows in most clear and unequivocal terms that the appellant was admitted in the jail hospital for the treatment of unsoundness of mind and insanity on 7.3.1996 i.e., only the third day of his remand. The learned court below in the impugned judgment has recorded a finding which is against the weight of the evidence on the record. The finding of the learned court below runs thus "From the perusal of the case record and evidences of the PWs, I find that there is no evidence either oral or documentary that accused Madras Nayak was insane on the date of the occurrence rather all the PWs who are co-villagers of the accused has categorically stated in their evidence that on the date of the occurrence he was quite sane." 22. It is equally relevant to mention here that the learned court below did not consider an unimpeachable circumstance on the record while arriving to the finding aforesaid. This unimpeachable circumstance is a meeting held in the Village in which the incident regarding the commission of the murder of the seven persons as well as injury caused to other seven persons were deliberated upon and it was decided that all the witnesses have to depose in a manner so that the appellant may not escape and he stands convicted. For this I will refer the evidence of P.Ws. 10, 1, 2 and 11. For this I will refer the evidence of P.Ws. 10, 1, 2 and 11. P.W. 10, the informant, in para 12 of his testimony has deposed that there had been a meeting in the village in which it was decided that the appellant should be convicted for committing the murder in question as well as causing injury to other seven persons in the occurrence. P.W. 1, in para 4 of his evidence, has also deposed that a meeting was held in the village and it was decided that the appellant has to be convicted and all the villagers are unanimous that the appellant is convicted. P.W. 2 in para 3 of his evidence, has deposed in the most clear and unequivocal terms that the appellant is alone in the village and rest of the villagers are unanimous regarding the fact that the appellant is convicted and a consensus in respect thereof has arisen in the meeting. P.W. 11, in para 4 of his evidence, has also deposed that the said meeting was attended by the politicians of the different political parties in which it was decided that the appellant has to be convicted and the witnesses have to depose as per the dictates of the meeting to achieve that end. He has further deposed that the said meeting was organized on the following day of the occurrence, which was attended by the villagers of the P.O. village and the politicians of the different political parties and as a result of the deliberations in the meeting, the villagers became unanimous for getting the appellant convicted in the case. He has also deposed that the said meeting was attended by Ganga Mukhiya, Harku Mukhiya and Sri Vishwanath Bhagat, a member of Legislative Assembly. In view of the evidence aforesaid, it appears that the ocular witnesses of the occurrence have deliberately suppressed the truth regarding the fact that the appellant was suffering from unsoundness of mind and insanity at the time of the commission of the occurrence as a result of the deliberation of the meeting. The learned court below did not meticulously consider this aspect of the matter in arriving at the conclusion against the appellant that he was suffering with insanity at the relevant time. Therefore, the finding of the learned court below referred to above also suffers with legal infirmities in respect thereof. The learned court below did not meticulously consider this aspect of the matter in arriving at the conclusion against the appellant that he was suffering with insanity at the relevant time. Therefore, the finding of the learned court below referred to above also suffers with legal infirmities in respect thereof. It is equally relevant to mention here tha1 the I.O. has not taken oath in this case and there is also no legal evidence regarding the seizure of blood stained Tangi and Dabli and the said weapon of assault have also not been brought on the record. It appears from the facts and circumstances emerging on the record, as per the evidence of the prosecution witnesses referred to above, that the appellant was definitely not of sound mind and sane at the relevant time while committing the offence. The sheer brutality of the assault in the absence of any provocation is a circumstance of unimpeachable character, which leads to the inference that the mind of the appellant was, in fact, unhinged, and far from normal at or about the time when the appellant committed the murder of his two infant sons and his wife inside his house and thereafter four other persons and also assaulted seven other persons including his younger son as his mind was unsound. There is nothing on the record to suggest that the appellant had any animus against his wife or his two infant children whose murder he has committed as well as other son whom he has assaulted before committing the murder of other four persons in this case. There is also nothing on the record to show that there was any provocation to him by any of the deceased or any injured person. It further appears that there is also no particular motive at all for the appellant for the commission of the murder of seven persons and for the assault of other seven persons besides killing the cattle. Furthermore, it was also not pre-planned as a result of cool consideration and meditation. The facts and circumstances lead to the conclusion that in a certain stage of imbalance of mind the appellant has committed the crime. Furthermore, it was also not pre-planned as a result of cool consideration and meditation. The facts and circumstances lead to the conclusion that in a certain stage of imbalance of mind the appellant has committed the crime. It is pertinent to mention here that the appellant has not specifically taken up the defence of legal insanity in this case, but on the basis of the evidence it appears that the appellant was suffering from unsoundness of mind and it could not be said that he was quite sane at the relevant time. It appears that in the stage of mental imbalance he has committed the murder of seven persons and has also assaulted seven other persons besides killing cattle. In such a situation it is for consideration as to whether at the time of the commission of the offence the appellant by reason of unsoundness of mind was incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law. The crucial point of time for ascertaining the state of mind of the appellant is the time when the offence was committed and whether the appellant was in such a state of mind as to be entitled to the benefit of section 84 of the LP.C. can only be established from the circumstances which preceded, attended and followed the crime. It appears from the evidence which I have referred to above that the entire conduct of the appellant from the time he committed the murder of his wife along with his two infant children besides he has committed the murder of four other persons and causing injury to seven other persons including his son and also killing the cattle, ox and she-goat which came in his way and up to the time he was undertrial prisoner in Birsa Munda Central Jail during the pendency of the proceeding before the learned court below was consistent with the fact that he was in a fit of insanity during the relevant time. The materials on the record, such as, oral and documentary evidence, presumptions, admissions and even the prosecution witnesses clearly satisfies that his action was not of a prudent man and considering all the aspects in totality I have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that it may not be sufficient to discharge the burden under section 105 of the Evidence Act but it definitely raises a reasonable doubt as regards one or other of the necessary ingredients of the offence of murder regarding the absence of requisite intention laid down under section 299 of the I.P.C. which tantamounts that the prosecution has definitely failed to prove conclusively the guilt of the accused. I, therefore, hold in view of the evidence on the record that the appellant was suffering from imbalance of mind at the relevant time when the occurrence was committed and he by reason of unsoundness of mind and insanity has committed the occurrence in question. It is a mandate of• the law as contained in section 84 of I.P.C. that 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. The learned court below did not meticulously consider the evidence on the record in proper perspective and has erred in coming to the finding of the guilt of the appellant rather he was swayed by the number of the persons killed in the occurrence besides assault on seven other persons and the learned court below has equally gravely erred in coming to the finding of the guilt of the appellant. Therefore, the impugned judgment is unsustainable. 23. Considering all the pros and cons of the matter besides the facts. circumstances and materials on the record the impugned judgment suffers with illegality, which requires an interference therein. There is merit in the appeal and it succeeds. The appeal is hereby allowed. The impugned judgment of the learned court below is hereby set aside. The appellant is not found guilty of the charges levelled against him and he is accordingly acquitted. Let he be set free forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. 24. The Death Reference is hereby accordingly disposed of. Lakshman Uraon, J.-I agree.