JUDGMENT:- The appellant was charged for offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code for committing murder of her real brother - Raju Sitaram Gedam, who was a Police Constable. 2. The appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 304(1) of Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, Rigorous Imprisonment for one year. 3. As noted by the learned Sessions Judge, eye-witnesses of the incident, namely [1] mother, [2] sister PW-3 Vanita, and [3] mothers sister have all turned hostile, and have tried to support the accused. 4. Perusal of record reveals that First Information Report was lodged by PW-3 Vanita Sitaram Gedam, sister of the accused. 5. In the First Information Report, PW-3 - Vanita mentions the name of one Smt. Reheema Siddiqui. Record shows that police have recorded statement of Smt. Raheema Siddiqui, while she is not examined before the Court. Statement of Smt. Raheema Siddiqui recorded by police under Section 161 of Criminal Procedure Code does not carry evidentiary value, however, fact remains that it is on record and it contains a statement that she had accompanied the accused who had come to her and wanted that she should accompany the accused to the Police Station. It also appears that said Smt. Raheema Siddiqui may have accompanied the accused to Police Station, however, prosecution has not brought this witness. 6. Post-mortem Notes [Exh.17] disclose following injuries:- I) HEADREGION - Iniury No.1 :- Incised wound of size 5 x 1 x 1 cm on right parieto temporal region on scalp. II) ON RIGHT SIDE - injury No.2 :- Near wrist stab wound of size OF BODY 4 x ½ x ½ cm between thumb and forefinger. Iniury No.3 :- On Right forearm stab wound of size 2 x 1 cm on posterior aspect. III) ON LEFT SIDE - Injury No.4 :- Stab wound on left neck of size 2 x ½ x ½ cm Injury No.5 :- 3 cm auxy from injury no.04 on deltoid, stab wound of size 3 ½ x 1½ x ½ cm. Injury No.6 :- 1 cm away from injury no.05, stab wound of size 2 x 1 x ½ cm. Iniury No.7 :- ½ cm away from injury no.06. Right side stab wound of size 2 x ½ cm. Injury No.6 :- 1 cm away from injury no.05, stab wound of size 2 x 1 x ½ cm. Iniury No.7 :- ½ cm away from injury no.06. Right side stab wound of size 2 x ½ cm. Iniury No.8 :- Stab wound of size 2 x 1 cm on It. forearm. Iniury No.9 :- Stab wound of size 2 x 1 cm on It. forearm 1 cm back from Injury No.08. IV) ON LEFT CHEST - Injury No.10 :- Near nipple stab wound of size 2½ x ½ cm. Injury No.11 :- 14 em away from injury no. 10 on lower rib region stab wound of size 5.5 x 2.5 cm with subcutaneous fat coming out and dried. Injury No.12 :- Near Injury No.11 5 cm away stab wound of size 2 x 1 cm. [Quoted from page no.4 of the Post-mortem Report dated 30th April, 2009]. 7. The cause of death is hemorrhage owing to multiple injuries. 8. Spot Panchanama discloses that the dead body of the deceased was lying in the open space near the guava tree in front of the house and near the road. 9. Spot Panchanama reveals that the act of assault with knife was done by assailant in the open courtyard. The dead body was found lying on the soil soaked with blood. 10. The Panchanama of seizure of clothes of the accused discloses blood stains on her clothes ranging from 0.1 cm to 2 cms., and blood group thereof is A. which corresponds to the blood group of the deceased. 11. The case, therefore, turns out to be one based on circumstantial evidence, as all eye-witnesses have turned hostile. 12. Learned Adv., for the appellant has argued in favour of clean acquittal, and alternatively, for a lenient view, urging that the circumstances do prove that the deceased had caused grave and sudden provocation to the accused. 13. In order to urge for total acquittal, learned Adv. Mr. Bapat has argued that if the vast range of injuries on the body or person of the deceased are seen, one is constrained to believe that the assault may not be an act of a solitary assailant. 14. The First Information Report, which is duly proved by the Investigating Officer, makes it clear that the deceased acted in such a manner that he must have intimidated and provoked the witnesses as well as the accused. 14. The First Information Report, which is duly proved by the Investigating Officer, makes it clear that the deceased acted in such a manner that he must have intimidated and provoked the witnesses as well as the accused. 15. Had PW-3 Anita supported the prosecution, undoubtedly, the complaint was to be proved by herself and she was to be a witness exactly of the fatal assault by the accused, as well as other facts depicted in the First Information Report proving intimidation and provocation given by deceased Raju which circumstances were bound to operate as either extenuating or mitigating circumstances. 16. Learned Adv. Mr. Bapat has then argued that had provocation been proved, analogy of proportion shall not have application. Provocation is an act by which a person loses his discretion and it is an act which he or she would not do in ordinary course do, had not the concerned provoked. 17. In the present case, it is seen from First Information Report that the conduct of Raju, the deceased, was all throughout troubling and ill-treating his mother and sisters. 18. On the given day as well, Raju, the deceased, had arrived drunk, abused the sisters, thrown away the platter of dinner served for him and even has thrown a wooden plank so as to hit the mother, in the background that the accused was in her cool and in pacifying mood. 19. Though it is stated in First Information Report that the deceased Raju had thrown the wooden plank to hit his mother, she had run away and saved herself. In absence of further and detailed circumstances being brought on record by witnesses or by the accused through cross-examination, or otherwise, it is hard to believe that the acts committed by the deceased were of such nature that those resulted into grave and sudden provocation of the accused. 20. Perusal of evidence does not satisfy the test of grave and sudden provocation so as to completely extenuate the accused of her acts being an offence. 21. This Court is, however, persuaded to believe that causing so grave injuries singly by the accused seems to be improbable. The prosecution has failed in exploring and investigating the offence and to book if there were more than one person involved in commission of offence. 22. 21. This Court is, however, persuaded to believe that causing so grave injuries singly by the accused seems to be improbable. The prosecution has failed in exploring and investigating the offence and to book if there were more than one person involved in commission of offence. 22. In the result, this Court is persuaded to believe that the entire liability of injuries being caused by the accused single handedly cannot be said to have been proved. Yet, considering that there were other persons involved in the commission of offence and having regard to collective effect of injuries, though intention is not proved, and appellant has been acquitted of charge under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, appellant was certainly responsible for her act of joining other accused though they were not charged. 23. In this background, it is also most imminent that the accused must have been got provoked and did not remain in herself, and has fatally assaulted the deceased. 24. In the premises discussed in the foregoing paras, the Judgment impugned, therefore, in so far as it relates to offence punishable under Section 304(1) of Indian Penal Code is concerned, is unassailable, and deserves to be confirmed. 25. In so far as the aspect of sentence is concerned, heard learned Adv. Mr. Bapat for the appellant. Mr. Bapat argues that though the aspect of grave and sudden provocation is not accepted by this Court, yet the proved document First Information Report needs due advertance as to the facts proved therein, namely conduct of the deceased was such that he had undoubtedly behaved with his first kins, particularly sisters and mother, which would ordinarily provoke any individual in given situation. Though the degree of provocation is not adequate enough to bring the case within the exception of Section 300 of Indian Penal Code, however, would certainly be adequate enough to operate as circumstances mitigating the sentence. 26. The learned Sessions Judge has awarded full sentence as prescribed in Section 304(1) of Indian Penal Code, and the case, thus, certainly does not justify sentence to full tune, which even is not a normal rule and practice. 27. 26. The learned Sessions Judge has awarded full sentence as prescribed in Section 304(1) of Indian Penal Code, and the case, thus, certainly does not justify sentence to full tune, which even is not a normal rule and practice. 27. Considering the age of the accused and that she is a woman and, undoubtedly, she was led to a peculiar set of mind to retaliate the behaviour of the deceased, this Court is satisfied with the submission that the gravity of her act undoubtedly is toned down and the circumstances do mitigate the need of softer sentence. 28. The appellant has been in jail since April, 2009. By this time, period of actual imprisonment undergone by the accused is about one year and two months, excluding remissions, if any, earned by her. 29. In the result, this Court is satisfied that the sentence be modified to the period actually undergone. 30. Appeal is accordingly partly allowed. Appellant be released forthwith unless required in any other case. Ordered accordingly.