Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1140 (GAU)

Manglu Kumar v. State of Assam

2012-09-27

AMITAVA ROY, PRASANTA KUMAR SAIKIA

body2012
JUDGMENT P.K. Saikia, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.12.05 passed in Sessions Case No. 200/03 by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur convicting the accused/appellant under section 302 /436 IPC and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to undergone R.I. for another period of two months for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to R.I. for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to undergone imprisonment for another period of one month for offence under Section 436 IPC. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with such judgment, the accused/appellant has preferred this appeal. 2. The prosecution case, as it emerges, during trial in brief is that the accused is a resident of Garakhla Pukhuri village under Tezpur Police Station. On the night of 07.10.03, he was sleeping in one of the rooms of his house. His wife and his minor daughter, aged about 8 years, were also sleeping in the same room. Smti. Durgi Kumar, the daughter of the accused along with her friend, named "Mogo" was also sleeping in a room adjacent to the room where the accused along with his wife and minor daughter were sleeping on that all eventful night. 3. Sometime after midnight, Smti. Durgi Kumar awoke up from her sleep hearing noise coming from the room where her parents were sleeping. She, therefore, immediately rushed to such room only to see her mother and sister being slaughtered by her own father. On seeing her in the room, the accused also threatened to kill her. The turn of events frightened her so much so that she fled her home taking Mogo, her friend, with her and came to the residence of Budhua Kumar, the brother of the accused person and narrated him what she had witnessed in her own house moments before. 4. While she was in the house of her uncle, Budhua Kumar, she saw her house being set on fire by her father. Thereafter, she came to the house of one Sankadhar Sahu and reported him about the incident aforesaid. As the incident occurred at night, nothing could be done to report the matter to Police immediately after the incident. Next day, Budhua Kumar lodged an FIR with the Police. Thereafter, she came to the house of one Sankadhar Sahu and reported him about the incident aforesaid. As the incident occurred at night, nothing could be done to report the matter to Police immediately after the incident. Next day, Budhua Kumar lodged an FIR with the Police. Having received the FIR, Police registered a case and an investigation into the incident, aforementioned. 5. During the course of investigation, the I/O visited the place of occurrence, arrested the accused person, held inquest on the dead body and sent the dead body to Civil Hospital for post mortem examination and also seized some articles and on completion of the investigation, he submitted the charge sheet under Section 302 /436 IPC against the accused person and forwarded him to the court to face his trial there. Since the offence U/s. 302 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, learned Magistrate before whom charge sheet was so laid, committed the case to the Court of Sessions at Sonitpur, Tezpur for disposal in accordance with law. 6. Learned Trial Court after commitment of the case and on hearing the parties, framed charge under Section 302 /436 IPC against the accused person and charges, so framed, on being read over and explained to the accused person, he pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried. During trial, the prosecution has examined as many as 8 (eight) witnesses including the Medical Officer and the I/O. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr. P.C. 7. In his examination U/s. 313 Cr. Pc, the accused denied the charges, leveled against him. However, on being required, he declined to adduce any evidence of his own. On conclusion of the trial and after hearing the parties thereto, learned Trial Court convicted the accused/appellant under Section 302/436 IPC and sentenced him as aforesaid. It is this judgment which has been assailed herein this appeal. 8. The learned Amicus Curiae opening up an argument on behalf of the accused person has fairly submitted that in view of the materials oh record, he is not going to dispute the prosecution claim that on the night in question, the accused killed his wife and his daughter. He has further submitted that the claim of the prosecution that the accused set his dwelling house on fire has also not been disputed by the learned Amicus Curiae. 9. He has further submitted that the claim of the prosecution that the accused set his dwelling house on fire has also not been disputed by the learned Amicus Curiae. 9. He, however, contends that there is copious but irrefutable evidence to show that at the time when the accused committed the offence, he was suffering from insanity of such degree that he was incapable of knowing the nature of his act or what he was doing was wrong or unlawful. More importantly, even before and after the commission of offence, he exhibited madness of same degree. 10. However, these important aspects were not at all considered by the learned Trial Court while convicting the accused of offence under Section 302 /436 IPC and sentencing him to punishment as aforesaid. He, therefore, urges this Court to acquit the accused person giving him the benefit provided by Section 84 IPC. In that connection, he has referred us to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in reported in 2010 10 SCC 568. 11. In trying to refute such argument, advanced from the side of the accused/appellant, Mr. D Das, learned Addl. PP, Assam has contended that materials on record amply demonstrate that the accused committed the murder of his wife as well as his minor daughter. But his misdeed did not end there. Even after committing such a shocking and ghastly offence, he set his own house on fire. These are telltale testimony of the accused not being insane person during the time under consideration. 12. In order to strength his claim more and more, the learned PP has referred us to the fact that at no point of time during trial, the accused claimed the benefit of Section 84 IPC. His simple plea was that he is innocent and that the case in question was falsely foisted on him. As he fails to raise such an important plea any time during trial, he cannot be allowed to raise such a plea for the first time in appeal. 13. According to him, the plea of insanity was a devise just to screen the accused/appellant from punishment for the offences which he committed on the night of 07.10.03. It is also a clever ploy employ to hide the truth from the notice of the Court. 13. According to him, the plea of insanity was a devise just to screen the accused/appellant from punishment for the offences which he committed on the night of 07.10.03. It is also a clever ploy employ to hide the truth from the notice of the Court. He, therefore, urges this Court to dismiss the appeal on affirming the judgment of the Trial Court instead. 14. We have given our anxious consideration to the rival submissions, advanced from the side of the respective lawyer of the parties. However, before appreciating such arguments, we find it necessary to have a brief review of the evidence on record and the evidence of Medical Officer who conducted the autopsy on the dead bodies is first taken up for consideration. 15. The Medical Officer who had conducted the post mortem examination on the dead bodies was examined as PW1 and he was Dr. Dibakar Saikia. According to him, on 8.10.03, he was posted as Medical & Health Officer at Kanaklata Civil Hospital, Tezpur. On that day, he performed the post mortem examination on the body of one Smti Banuni Kumar, aged about 45 years and found the followings:- EXTERNAL APPEARANCE: A dead body of a female person aged about 45 years. Rigor Mortis present. INJURIES 1. Clotted blood present all over the body. 2. A sharp cutting injury on the lower part of the neck cutting all the vessels, nerves, soft tissues and vertebrae. 3. Sharp cutting injury on the left side of the abdomen. Size 10" x 2" deep into the abdominal cavity. 4. Sharp cutting injury on the right elbow joint Size 3"X 1" 5. Sharp cutting injury on the left arm. Size 3"x 1" All other organs were found healthy. Injuries were ante mortem in nature. OPINION In the opinion of the said Medical Officer, the cause of death of deceased Bauni Kumar was due to injuries sustained. 16. On the same day, the said Medical Officer performed Post Mortem Examination of the dead body of one Smti Lape Kumar and his findings are as follows:- EXTERN AN APPEARANCE: A dead body of a female person aged about 8 years. Rigor Mortis present. INJURIES: 1. The dead body is beheaded by a sharp cutting injury at the ball of the neck. 2. A sharp cutting injury on the back. Size 3" x 1"x 1" 3. Clotted blood present all over the body. Rigor Mortis present. INJURIES: 1. The dead body is beheaded by a sharp cutting injury at the ball of the neck. 2. A sharp cutting injury on the back. Size 3" x 1"x 1" 3. Clotted blood present all over the body. All other organs were found healthy. Injuries were ante mortem in nature. OPINION: In the opinion of the said Medical Officer, the cause of death of deceased Lape Kumar was due to injuries sustained by her. 17. PW1 had proved the Post Mortem Reports in respect of Bauni Kumar and Lape Kumar as Ext. 1 and Ext. 2 respectively. He opined that the deaths of the aforesaid persons were caused by anti mortem wounds inflicted by with sharp edged weapon and deaths of the persons, aforesaid were homicidal in nature. The appellant, however, did not dispute above aspect of the prosecution case as it is found evident from argument, advanced by learned Amicus Curiae on behalf of the accused/appellant. 18. So situated, let us consider the testimony of witness(s) who claimed to have seen the alleged incident. We have found that the only witness who claimed to have seen the incident in question was one Smti Durgi Kumar (PW 5) who happens to the daughter of the accused According to her, on the night in question, her father along with her mother and sister was sleeping in one of the rooms of their house. 19. She was sleeping in an adjacent room of the same house. One of her friends Mago' was also with her on that night. However, around the mid-night, she awoke up from sleep as she heard hue and cry coming from the room where her parents were sleeping on that night She immediately rushed to the room aforesaid. Arriving there, she saw her mother and sister being killed by her own father and he did so with an axe. 20. When her father noticed her, he also threatened to kill her. She straight away fled the scene and rushed towards the house of her uncle Budhua taking Mago, her friend, with her and reported the incident to her uncle. When she was in the house of her uncle nearby, she saw their dwelling house being put on fire by her father. She, thereafter, went to the house of one Sri. She straight away fled the scene and rushed towards the house of her uncle Budhua taking Mago, her friend, with her and reported the incident to her uncle. When she was in the house of her uncle nearby, she saw their dwelling house being put on fire by her father. She, thereafter, went to the house of one Sri. Sankhadhar Sahu and informed him what was going on in their house on the night. 21. In her cross examination, she has admitted that her father was not a normal person, that on many occasions, prior to the incident in question, he exhibited abnormal behavior. She also opines that incident which occurred on the night of 07.10.03 was caused by his father perhaps due to his mental illness. 22. PW 2 Sri. Budhua Kumar, brother of the accused person, has deposed that his house is situated at a distance of 500 yards from the house of the accused person. On the night aforesaid, PW 5, Smti Durgi Kumar came to his house running, awoke him up from sleep and told him that her father had killed her mother and her sister Lape. As she was narrating the incident, they also saw the accused setting his own house on fire. 23. He came to the place of occurrence but could not approach the accused since they found him in an extremely violent mood, and since, he was armed with a bow and arrow as well. They therefore, waited till the breaking of the day. In the morning, they went to the house of Gaonburah, Til Bahadur @ Sane and told him about the incident under consideration. On being advised by Gaonburah, he went to Bebejia Police Outpost and lodged an FIR there. 24. In his cross examination, he has stated that the accused turned violent quite often and on, that after the occurrence, the accused was prattling incoherently and that even after committing the offence, he made no attempt to escape from the place of occurrence. He has opined that the accused might have committed the offence during the spell when he was struck with madness. 25. PW 4, Sri. Sankhadhar Sahu, also a neighbor of the accused, has deposed that on the fateful night, PW 5 and her friend Mago, came to his house and woke up his wife from sleep. He has opined that the accused might have committed the offence during the spell when he was struck with madness. 25. PW 4, Sri. Sankhadhar Sahu, also a neighbor of the accused, has deposed that on the fateful night, PW 5 and her friend Mago, came to his house and woke up his wife from sleep. They told them that a serious incident had occurred in the house of accused person. He did not immediately go to the house of the accused person as he was not keeping well at that time. Next morning, Ganesh Barhoi came to his house and reported him what had occurred in the household of accused person on the night of 07.10.03. 26. He, thereafter, advised them to report the matter to the Police as well as one Til Bahadur, Gaonburah of the adjacent village. Being so advised, Budhua went to the Police Station to lodge an FIR, he also accompanied him. On the way to Police Station, as they passed by the side the house of the accused person, they noticed the accused standing in his compound. They also found that the house of the accused was burnt to ashes. 27. It is also in his evidence that during the course of investigation, Police seized an axe as well as some half burnt pieces of bamboo and thatch on the strength of seizure lists Ext. 5 and 6 respectively. In his cross examination, he has stated that he knew accused to be a good man. But since before the alleged incident, he was behaving quite abnormally. It is also in his evidence that he came to know about such abnormality in the behavior of accused/appellant from his own brother, namely, Budhua. 28. PW 3 is Til Bahadur Thapa. According to him, one day in the morning, Budhua came to his house and told him that the accused had murdered Ms wife and daughter. He immediately went to the house of the accused person and saw him sitting in the courtyard near the dead bodies of his wife and daughter with an axe in his hand. Seeing all these, he instructed Budhua (PW 2) to report the matter to the Police. Being so informed, Police came to the place of occurrence. 29. He immediately went to the house of the accused person and saw him sitting in the courtyard near the dead bodies of his wife and daughter with an axe in his hand. Seeing all these, he instructed Budhua (PW 2) to report the matter to the Police. Being so informed, Police came to the place of occurrence. 29. On arriving at the place of occurrence, Police conducted inquest on the dead bodies and prepared a report in that connection which was proved Ext. 3. It is also heard saying that the Police seized an axe and some half burnt pieces of bamboo on the strength of seizure lists, Ext. 5 and Ext. 6. In his cross examination, he has stated as he resides at a distance of 5 km from the house of the accused person, he did not know whether the accused had been suffering from mental disease since before the alleged incident. 30. PW 7, Sri. Ganesh Barhoi is a village headman of the village concerned. According to him, on the night in question, he was informed that the accused had killed his wife and his minor daughter and also set his house on fire. Though, he got the information at the night itself, he did not come to the place of occurrence till morning. In the morning, as he prepared to go to the house of the accused person, he was told by the people, gathered there that accused was in an extremely violent mood. 31. Therefore, out of fear, he did not go to the house of the accused person and instead he reported the matter to the Police over phone. On receipt of the information, Police came to the place of occurrence, held inquest on the dead bodies and prepared inquest report (Ext. 3) in that connection. Police also seized half burnt bamboo pieces on the strength of the seizure list Ext. 6. In his cross examination, he has stated that when he arrived at the place of occurrence in the morning of 08.10.03, he saw the accused behaving like a mad man brandishing an axe at the people. 32. PW 6, Sri. Kashinath Kumar, is the son of the accused. He has stated that after his arrival at his house on the morning of 08.10.03, he saw their house being reduced to ashes. 32. PW 6, Sri. Kashinath Kumar, is the son of the accused. He has stated that after his arrival at his house on the morning of 08.10.03, he saw their house being reduced to ashes. He also found that the dead bodies of his mother and sister lying there. In his cross examination, he has also stated that his father was behaving like a mad man at that time. 33. PW 8 is a Sub-Inspector of Police and the I.O. of the case under consideration. According to him, on 8.10.2003 he was posted at Babejia Police Out Post. On that day, at about 8.30 A.M., he received a telephonic message from one from one Ganesh Barhoi (PW 7) regarding the alleged incident. After making the G.D. entry, he visited the place of occurrence. On the arrival at the place of occurrence, he saw that the accused was standing with an axe in his hand. He was in an extremely ferocious mood. 34. He, however, overpowered him with the help of villagers and took him into the custody. It is also in his evidence that he noticed two dead bodies lying in the courtyard of the accused person. He also found that the accused was sitting by the side of the dead bodies. The house of the accused had already been reduced to ashes. He seized an axe and some half burnt articles on the strength of seizure lists, Ext. 5 and Ext. 6 respectively. 35. In the course of the investigation, he held inquest on the dead bodies and prepared a report in that connection which was proved as Ext. 3 sent those bodies to the hospital for post mortem examination. In the meantime, he received an FIR from one Budhua Kumar. According to him, Material Ext. 1, Material Ext. 2 and Material Ext. 3 are the seized axe and two bundles of half burnt bamboo. 36. Above being the evidence on record, let us first ascertain how far evidence makes out the allegation brought against the accused person. On a very careful perusal of the evidence of ocular as well as the Medical Officer together with averments in the Ext. 1, Ext. 2 and Ext. 36. Above being the evidence on record, let us first ascertain how far evidence makes out the allegation brought against the accused person. On a very careful perusal of the evidence of ocular as well as the Medical Officer together with averments in the Ext. 1, Ext. 2 and Ext. 3 in their totality, we have also found that materials on record very firmly demonstrate that on the fateful night, the accused killed his wife and his daughter in his house and also set his house on fire. 37. These revelations which emerge from the evidence on record are not at all disputed by appellant either, for, we have already found that learned Amicus Curiae during the course of argument has very fairly submitted that materials on record quite unambiguously show that on the night in question, the accused not only killed his wife and minor daughter but also set his house on fire. Being so, we have no difficulty in concluding that accused did kill his wife and daughter and also put his house on fire on the night of 07.10.03. 38. However, learned Amicus Curiae has, as stated above, arduously contended that at the time when incident under consideration occurred, the accused was a person who by reason of unsoundness of mind was incapable of knowing the nature of the act he had committed or what he was doing was wrong or contrary to law. Materials already available on record abundantly establish such a proposition. However, learned Trial Court ignored all those materials on record and held that the accused is guilty of offences he was charged with, convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to punishment as aforesaid. 39. The learned PP appearing for the State of Assam, however, thoroughly disputed the claim that the accused was an insane person during under consideration. According to him, the claim of insanity is invented by the accused just to protect him from the misdeeds of unimaginable proportion which he committed on the night of 07.10.03. He further submits that as the accused did not raise such an important plea any time during trial, now, he cannot be allowed to raise the same before this Court during appeal. 40. He further submits that as the accused did not raise such an important plea any time during trial, now, he cannot be allowed to raise the same before this Court during appeal. 40. Rival claims above require us to decide as to whether it is permissible under the law to raise the plea of insanity which the accused did not raise before the Court below any time during the trial? Some oilier quarries which have huge relevance to the maters under enquiry and which call for our decisions thereon are (a) whether there is any standard prescribed for determining the claim of plea of insanity raised in a proceeding, if so, what is the standard of such proof and (b) whether there is/are any guideline(s) to ascertain such plea. 41. In so far first question is concerned, we may profitably peruse the decision of Rajasthan High Court rendered in the case of Gangada Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 1975 Cri. LJ 1445. In Gangada Vs. State of Rajasthan (Supra), it has been held as follows: If the accused has a right of private defence, he can raise the plea for the first time in the trial court or in the appeal. He is not precluded from taking such plea at the trial, merely because he omitted to set it out in the committing court. He can certainly show from the prosecution evidence and other material on record that he acted in the exercise of his right of private defence or person or property. 42. Similar view has been rendered by a Court none other than the Apex Court of the country in the case of State of UP Vs. Md. Khan reported in AIR 1977 SC 2226 , wherein it was held as follows: It is true that applicants in their statement under Section 342 Cr. P.C. had not taken the plea of private defence, but necessary basis for that plea had been laid in the cross-examination of the prosecution as well as by adducing defence evidence. It is well settled that even if an accused does not plead self-defence, it is open to the court to consider such plea if the same arises from the material on record. 43. It is well settled that even if an accused does not plead self-defence, it is open to the court to consider such plea if the same arises from the material on record. 43. The decisions above, clearly answer the contention from the side of prosecution/respondent that plea of insanity cannot be raised at the stage of appeal if same was not raised by the accused during trial. Quite contrary to it, an accused can raise such a plea even at the stage of appeal or a Court of appeal can consider the same, provided off course, materials on record justify such an exercise. 44. In so far second query is concerned, it may be stated that such a question has been considered many a times by different High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court as well. Without multiplying the decisions rendered on this count, we may very well referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pratap Vs. State of UP reported in AIR 1976 SC 966 . In that case, it was held that the accused person who pleads an exception is entitled to be acquitted if upon a consideration of the evidence as a whole (including the evidence given in support of the plea of the general exception) a reasonable doubt is created in the mind of the Court about the guilt of the accused. 45. In other words, an accused who pleads exception is to probabilise his claim as it has been done in civil case. 46. Coming to the third question, viz., whether there is/are any guideline(s) in determining the plea of insanity, it can be stated that a set of guidelines concerning the matter aforesaid has been coined by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Sunil Sandeep Vs. State of Karnataka reported in 1993 Cri. LJ 2554 (Kant). 46. Coming to the third question, viz., whether there is/are any guideline(s) in determining the plea of insanity, it can be stated that a set of guidelines concerning the matter aforesaid has been coined by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Sunil Sandeep Vs. State of Karnataka reported in 1993 Cri. LJ 2554 (Kant). In that case, Hon'ble Karnataka High Court held that when insanity is pleaded in determining such insanity some principles may be kept in mind, they are: (a) every type of insanity is not legal insanity, the cognitive faculty must be so destroyed as to render one incapable of knowing the nature of his act or that what he is doing is wrong or contrary to law; (b) the Court shall presume the absence of such insanity; (c) the burden of proof of legal insanity is on the accused, though it is not as heavy as on the prosecution; (d) the Court must consider whether the accused suffered from legal insanity at the time when the offence was committed; (e) in reaching such a conclusion, the circumstances which preceded, attended or followed the crime are relevant considerations; and (f) the prosecution in discharging its burden in the face of the plea of legal insanity has merely to prove the basic fact and rely upon the normal presumption of law that everyone knows the law and the natural consequences of his act. 47. The circumstances, enumerated by Orissa High Court in the case of Raghu Pradhan Vs. State of Orissa reported in 1993 Cri. LJ 1159 (Ori.) are also found to be equally helpful in deciding the questions of insanity raised by accused charged with crime. Those circumstances are: (a) motive; (b) deliberation and preparation; (c) desire for concealment; (d) conduct after commission of the crime showing consciousness of guilt and effort to avoid detection; (e) offer of excuse of making statements which false; and (f) conduct before, at the time and after the commission of offence. 48. On a conjoint reading of the decisions, aforesaid, it would appear that the conduct of an accused who claims the protection of Section 84 IPC needs to be considered from various angles and such conduct is to be considered at the stages more than one. They are: (a) pre-crime conduct (b) his conduct during the commission of crime and (c) his post crime conduct as well. They are: (a) pre-crime conduct (b) his conduct during the commission of crime and (c) his post crime conduct as well. In order to know how the accused herein behaved during the periods, aforesaid, we put the evidence on record to meticulous examination. 49. To appreciate the matter before us well, the behavior of the accused during the period running up to the incident in question is first taken up for consideration. Once again, the star campaigner in this regard is none other than PW 5, the daughter of the accused person. According to her, on the night in question, she woke up from her sleep hearing noise coming up from the room where her parents and her sister were sleeping on the all eventful night. Hearing the noise, she jumped up from the bed and rushed to the room and she saw her mother and sister being killed by her father. 50. On noticing her there, he also threatened to kill her for which she rushed to the residence of one Budhua her uncle taking her friend Mogo with her. It is found well evident that there was absolutely no reason on the part of the accused to either kill his wife and daughter or put his house on fire. Equally importantly, PW 5 too did not deserve such a horrible response from her father when she noticed her mother and her sister being killed by her own father. These are all eloquent testimonies of accused not being a normal man when he committed the incident in question. 51. Pre-crime conduct on the part of accused person can very well be ascertained from the testimonies rendered by (1) PW 2 Budhua Kumar, (2) PW 4 Sahu, (3) PW 5 Smti. Durgi Kumar, (4) PW 6 Kasinath Kumar and (5) PW 7 Shri Ganesh Barhoi. In her evidence, PW 5 Smti. Durgi Kumar, the daughter of the accused person, had very categorically stated that soon before the alleged incident, her father behaved in a very' abnormal way. She even apprehends that on the night in question, the accused killed her mother and her sister and also burnt down their house to ashes due to his insanity. 52. Such claims, made by PW 5 also echoed in the testimonies tendered by PW 4, PW 6 and PW 7, who are the neighbour, son and son-in-law of the accused respectively. 52. Such claims, made by PW 5 also echoed in the testimonies tendered by PW 4, PW 6 and PW 7, who are the neighbour, son and son-in-law of the accused respectively. All of them clearly state that the accused did not behave as a normal man since before the alleged incident. There is absolutely nothing on record to disbelieve the above evidence, so rendered by none other than prosecution witnesses. Such evidence therefore very firmly demonstrates that the accused was far from a normal man during the period running up to the alleged incident. 53. So situated, let us consider the post crime conduct of the accused person. It is found evident from the testimonies of almost all the witnesses that after killing his wife and daughter, he dragged their bodies to the courtyard, kept the bodies there and set hits own house on fire. Having committed the offence, he sat there till he was captured by Police with the help of villagers in the late noon on 08.10.03. 54. More importantly, there is copious but undisputable evidence on record including that of I/O (PW 8) to show that the accused remained violent so much so that no one could dare to approach him till Police come to the place of occurrence for which he apprehended him with great difficulty with the help of villagers. These speak out loud and clear that accused behaved very abnormally even after the alleged incident. 55. When his post crime conduct is considered together with his pre-crime conduct and the conduct during the time in question, there cannot be an escape from the conclusion that accused was not a normal man during the period running up to the alleged incident, during the time under consideration and even thereafter. These are prolific testimony to the fact that during the time under consideration, due to his insanity, the accused person was incapable of knowing the nature of the actor that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law. The fact that prosecution could not show any motive on the part of accused person in killing his wife and his minor daughter and also putting his house on fire as well as his refusal to leave the place of occurrence till he was arrested by the Police makes such a conclusion almost inevitable. 56. The fact that prosecution could not show any motive on the part of accused person in killing his wife and his minor daughter and also putting his house on fire as well as his refusal to leave the place of occurrence till he was arrested by the Police makes such a conclusion almost inevitable. 56. Therefore, we are constrained to hold that accused had been suffering from insanity which damage his cognitive faculty so much so that he was not at all in a position to know what he was actually doing on the night in question or that what he was doing was wrong or against the law. In the face of above revelation, we have no other option but to hold that the accused/appellant herein clearly come within the protection provided by Section 84 IPC. 57. It is worth noting that the learned PP very emphatically contended that the plea of insanity raised by the Amicus Curiae should not be accepted for other reasons as well. In that connection, it has been stated that there was absolutely no evidence on record to show that he was ever treated by Doctor any point of time during the period running up to time when incident under scrutiny occurred though he is said to have been suffering from insanity since before the incident aforesaid. This is a fluent testimony of nothing else but the defence setting up the plea of legal insanity just to screen the accused from the misdeeds which he had done on the night of 07.10.03. 58. However, such a claim is found to be without any substance whatsoever. A bare perusal of the evidence on record reveals that the accused and the deceased hail from that section of the society which lives more with superstition, illusion and delusion than with practicality, reality and reason. They also live in a society where magic practices rule the roost. Their living in abject poverty and total illiteracy may the reason for such a sorry state of affairs. They, therefore, hardly go to medical practitioner to get their disease diagnosed and treated. 59. In such a scenario, it is no wonder that the accused and his fellow villagers are guided more by quacks than by qualified persons. Their living in abject poverty and total illiteracy may the reason for such a sorry state of affairs. They, therefore, hardly go to medical practitioner to get their disease diagnosed and treated. 59. In such a scenario, it is no wonder that the accused and his fellow villagers are guided more by quacks than by qualified persons. In that view of the matter, in our considered opinion, non-examination of the accused by a Medical practitioner since before the alleged incident is of no consequences whatsoever, more so, when there is enormous evidence to show that all the time relevant, the accused behaved very abnormally. Being so, objection raised on this count in our considered opinion is required to be rejected which we accordingly do. 60. In the result, we are to hold that the accused before us is clearly covered by exception in corroborated under Section 84 IPC and as such, he is entitled to get the protection provided there-under. 61. Consequently, the appeal is allowed and the accused is acquitted of offence under Section 302 /436 IPC on setting aside impugned judgment The accused be set at liberty forth if he is not required in any other case. 62. Returned the LCR forthwith. 63. Before we part with the record, we cannot but observe that an insane person when turns violent become a threat to the society, and he, therefore, becomes a liability to the society and State. We have already found from materials on record that the accused suffered insanity of the highest degree during the period under consideration for which he committed act which entailed unimaginable consequences in the terms of destruction of persons and properties. 64. We are worried over the fact that there is every possibility of his slipping to such a state of mind once again in near or future if he is not put on proper treatment and medication. We, therefore, direct that the Inspector General of Prison, Assam to make an investigation/cause an investigation to be made in association with the Director of Health Services, Assam to ascertain his present mental health condition of the accused preferably within a period of two weeks from today. 65. We, therefore, direct that the Inspector General of Prison, Assam to make an investigation/cause an investigation to be made in association with the Director of Health Services, Assam to ascertain his present mental health condition of the accused preferably within a period of two weeks from today. 65. In the event of his being found still suffering from mental illness, we further direct the said authorities to refer the matter to the authority/authorities, created under the Mental Health Act 1987 to deal with him in accordance of aforesaid Act to ensure that he does not cause any harm to person and property any more. 66. We further call upon the aforesaid authorities to monitor his behavior periodically to see that the accused does not become a threat to society in near or distant future. 67. We appreciate the assistance rendered by Mr. P. Mahanta, learned Amicus Curiae and direct that an amount of Rs. 5000/- be paid to Mr. P. Mahanta as his remuneration by the State Legal Services Authority. In view of the provision prescribed by Section 357(A) Cr. P.C. the victim or his/her dependents are entitled to get compensation for rehabilitation in appropriate cases. Therefore, for the sake of brevity and in the light of our discussions, made in Criminal Appeal No. 93(J)/2005 (disposed on 22.12.2011), with regard to the victim compensation as provided by Section 357(A) Cr. P.C., we make the following directions:- (1) As an interim measure an amount of Rs. 50,000/- shall be deposited by the State Government with the District Legal Services Authority of Darrang District within a period of two months from this date. The District Legal Services Authority, on receipt of the said money, shall make an enquiry to ascertain as to whether, there is dependent(s), (not being the accused/appellant) who suffered loss and injury as a result of death of the deceased and if such dependent(s) or legal representative(s) need any rehabilitation. (2) upon such enquiry, if it is found that the dependent(s), if any, need rehabilitation, then the District Legal Services Authority shall initially release the said interim amount and thereafter, direct payment of adequate compensation, as may be prescribed by the scheme to be prepared by the State Government. (2) upon such enquiry, if it is found that the dependent(s), if any, need rehabilitation, then the District Legal Services Authority shall initially release the said interim amount and thereafter, direct payment of adequate compensation, as may be prescribed by the scheme to be prepared by the State Government. (3) it is made clear that if the District Legal Services Authority, after due enquiry arrives at the findings that there is no dependent(s) or that the dependent(s) of the deceased/victim does not required any rehabilitation, then the District Legal Services Authority, shall refund the said amount of Rs. 50,000/- without delay, in favour of the State Government. (4) A copy of this judgment be made available immediately to (1) the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Assam, (2) the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority Assam, (3) the Inspector General of Prison, Assam, (4) the Director of Health Services, Assam and (5) the District Legal Services Authority Darrang, Mangaldoi, for information and doing needful as indicated above.