JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, JJ. The instant appeal stands directed by the State of H.P. against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Kangra at Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, rendered on 29.07.2011 in Sessions Case No.23/2011 whereby, the latter Court convicted the accused/respondent for his committing an offence punishable under Section 304 (Part II) of the IPC besides sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years. 2. The facts relevant to decide the instant case are that on 23.08.2009 complainant Sapna Thakur along with her mother deceased Sunki Devi was present in their house at Kaddhar Bara Bhangal, Tehsil Baijnath, District Kangra, H.P. At about 10 p.m., in the night accused Swaroop Lal knocked at their door on which Sunaki Devi opened the door and accused told her that he wanted to stay in their house owing to night since he was going to Bara Bhangal with his horses. Thereafter complainant Sapna Thakur went to her room, whereas deceased as well as accused remained in the kitchen. After sometime, Sapna Thakur heard noise of quarrel and she went to other room/kitchen and saw that the accused was giving beatings to Sunki Devi with one iron pipe and Sapna Thakur tried to rescue her mother but could not as the accused was also having one knife. Then Sapna Thakur raised alarm upon which accused fled away from the spot. Upon the alarm of Sapna from the neighbourhood, one Gulab Singh came and saw Sunki Devi was lying in unconscious and injured condition. One Ram Lal also came to the house of Sapna Thakur and he also found Sunki Devi lying in the pool of blood with injury on her head. The father of Sapna who was at Bir was telephonically informed about the occurrence who brought the jeep to Baragran and Sunki Devi in injured condition was removed to Baragran from where she was taken to Baijnath hospital wherefrom she was referred to Tanda hospital and ultimately from Tanda She was referred to PGI, Chandigarh where she expired on 29.8.2009. Initially the medical examination of injured Sunki Devi was carried out at Baijnath hospital and after her death, her postmortem was conducted at PGI, Chandigarh. After her death inquest papers were filled in by the police. Upon the statement of complainant Sapna Thakur, the relevant FIR was registered at police station concerned. Initially the medical examination of injured Sunki Devi was carried out at Baijnath hospital and after her death, her postmortem was conducted at PGI, Chandigarh. After her death inquest papers were filled in by the police. Upon the statement of complainant Sapna Thakur, the relevant FIR was registered at police station concerned. The police started the investigations in the case and completed all the codal formalities. 3. On conclusion of investigations, into the offence, allegedly committed by the accused, a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was prepared and filed in the Court. 4. The accused was charged by the learned trial Court for his committing an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 20 witnesses. On conclusion of recording of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded by the trial Court, in which the accused claimed innocence and pleaded false implication. However, he did not lead any defence evidence. 5. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court, returned findings of conviction against the accused/respondent herein. 6. The State of H.P. stands aggrieved by the factum of the learned trial Court convicting and sentencing the accused under Section 304 (Part II) of the IPC instead of Section 302 of the IPC.. The learned Additional Advocate General has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned trial Court against the accused/respondent standing not based on a proper appreciation of evidence on record, rather, its standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation of material on record. Hence, he contends qua the conviction and sentence standing modified by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. 7. On the other hand, the learned defence counsel has with considerable force and vigour, contended qua the findings of conviction recorded by the Court below standing based on a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record and theirs not necessitating interference, rather theirs meriting vindication. 8. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has, with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record. 9. In proof of the prosecution case, complainant Sapna Thakur stepped into the witness box as PW-1. 8. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has, with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record. 9. In proof of the prosecution case, complainant Sapna Thakur stepped into the witness box as PW-1. She in her examination-in-chief deposes of on 23.8.2009, hers along with her mother being present at Kaddhar Baragran. She proceeds to testify of on the aforesaid day at 10 p.m. accused Swaroop Lal knocking the door of their house and on his revealing his identity/name to her mother, the latter opening it. She deposes of the accused being known to them yet his visiting her house for the first time. She communicates therein of his apprising them of his going to Barrabhangal with horses and owing to night hours his standing constrained to visit the house of PW-1, whereupon she further articulates therein of her mother permitting him to stay in her house. She proceeds to depose of hers departing to her room, whereas, her mother and the accused sitting in another room. After 1-1/2 hours, on hers hearing noise of their quarreling, she visited the relevant room whereat she noticed of the accused wielding a pipe which she had kept in the fire place, with user whereof he started beating her mother. She deposes of hers concerting to rescue her mother. Furthermore, she deposes of the accused also wielding a knife. However, on hers raising an alarm she deposes of the accused fleeing therefrom. On hers raising an alarm the villagers proceeded to her house, who asked her about the incident whereto whom she disclosed the factum of the accused belabouring her mother. The villagers then proceeded to telephone her father Lachhman, who was at Bir. In sequel to the accused belabouring her mother, she deposes of hers sustaining injuries on her head and other parts of her body, in sequel whereof she became unconscious. She deposes of the villagers lifting and taking her mother to Barragran wherefrom her mother was carried to Baijnath hospital, whereat her statement, comprised in Ex.PW1/A, stood recorded by the police, exhibit whereof she deposes to be carrying her signatures. She further deposes of the police during the course of holding investigations taking into possession iron pipe and knife bearing Ex.P-3 and Ex.P-4 respectively, possession whereof stood delivered by her to the Investigating Officer. She further deposes of the police during the course of holding investigations taking into possession iron pipe and knife bearing Ex.P-3 and Ex.P-4 respectively, possession whereof stood delivered by her to the Investigating Officer. She also deposes of at the time of preparation of Ex.PW1/B both, Raj Mal and Ramesh, who were present thereat signing it as witnesses. She deposes of hers also signing Ex.PW1/B as producer of the aforesaid weapons of offence. She narrates in her testimony comprised in her examination-in-chief of the accused taken to communicate to people qua his intending to marry her which stood objected to by her mother. She also deposes of her father refusing the proposal of the accused to marry her. She deposes of her mother expiring on 29.8.2009. She also deposes of on 25.8.2009 hers producing the clothes of her mother to the police which stood taken into possession under memo Ex.PW1/C, memo whereof, she deposes to be signed by both, Santosh and Mohan. In her cross-examination she deposes of hers making a disclosure in Ex.PW1/A to the police of the accused holding a knife in his hand yet the aforesaid fact remains unrecorded therein, yet she deposes of hers making a supplementary statement to the police qua the factum aforesaid. She concedes to the suggestion put to her by the learned defence counsel while holding her to cross-examination of on 23.8.2009 at 1.30 p.m. the accused arriving at her house whereat it was raining and of the accused on cesor of rain leaving there from. Further she also denied the suggestion put to her by the learned defence counsel while holding her to cross-examination of the accused in the night of 23.8.2009 not coming to her house. She also denied the factum of the accused not delivering pipe and knife blows on the person of her mother. 10. The deposition of PW-1 stands corroborated by PW-6, who on hearing the outcries raised by PW-1 arrived at her house whereat he deposes of PW-1 apprising him of her mother standing delivered blows of knife and iron pipe by the accused. Likewise an akin corroboration is lent to the deposition of PW-1 by PW-10, who alike PW-6 on hearing the outcries raised by PW-1 proceeded to her house. Dr. Likewise an akin corroboration is lent to the deposition of PW-1 by PW-10, who alike PW-6 on hearing the outcries raised by PW-1 proceeded to her house. Dr. S.K.Dwivedi, who subjected Sunki Devi, the mother of PW-1, to medical examination on 24.8.2009, in sequel whereof he prepared MLC, comprised in Ex.PW4/B, has pronounced therein his observing on the body of Sunki Devi the hereinafter extracted injuries:- “The alleged history of the case beaten by Swaroop Lal. On examination: Patient is semi conscious at the time of examination. -Pulse 68 per minute. -Respiration 14 per minute. -B.P. 100/60 mm of HG. -Pupils Reacting to light slugishly. Injuries 1. Incised wound with well defined margins on right side of occipital region size 3”x ½ “ x 1/2” with clotted blood. 2. Left parital side, lacerated wound with clotted blood size 2” x ½ “ ' ½”. 3. Move in right right hand. Advised for plain X-ray of Head AP and lateral view. Plain X-ray of right arm and forearm AP & lateral view. Paitent was admitted in the hospital. Injury: Simple/grievous. Duration of injury 12 to 16 hours. Weapon used to inflict this type of injury is sharp weapon. Injury No.2 by blunt weapon.” He with firmness deposes of the injuries noticed by him to be occurring on the body of Sunki Devi being a sequel to the user of knife P-4 and user of iron pipe Ex.P-3. 11. Since, deceased Sunki Devi ultimately died at PGI, Chandigarh, hence, on the requisition of the police comprised in Ex.PW20/A, PW-20 Dr. S.P. Mandal, Assistant Professor Department of Forensic Medicines, PGI subjected the body of Sunki Devi to postmortem examination. PW-20 has proven postmortem report comprised in Ex.PW20/B. The observations recorded therein stand extracted herein below:- 1. External Appearance Conditions of Subject Stout, Entnaciated, decomposed etc. clothing. Body was moderately built. Post mortem lividity was present on the back and rigormortis was present all over the body. Wounds, bruises, position size, nature Mark of Ligature and neck and dissection. (1) A stitched, oblique incised looking lacerated wound 6X 1 X0.5 Cms was present on right side occipital region of the scalp, 14 ½ Cms. Above the lateral end of right eye brow, goes backward and slightly medial. The margins were regular and contused. Wounds, bruises, position size, nature Mark of Ligature and neck and dissection. (1) A stitched, oblique incised looking lacerated wound 6X 1 X0.5 Cms was present on right side occipital region of the scalp, 14 ½ Cms. Above the lateral end of right eye brow, goes backward and slightly medial. The margins were regular and contused. (2) Stitched, oblique lacerated wound 4 x 1 x 0.5 Cms was present on left partial region of the scalp, 10 Cms above the lateral end of left eye brow goes backward and slightly downward. The margins were regular and contused. (3) Stitched, oblique lacerated wound 4 x 1.2 x 0.5 Cms. Was present on left partial region of the scalp, 2.5 Cms., above the injury No.2. The Margins were regular and contused. Operated injuries:- - Stitched 32 Cms. Surgical craniotomy wound was present on left side frontal, partial and occipital region of the scalp. - Stitched surgical wound 10 Cms. Present on right side abdomen, inside 4 pieces of skull bone was present with fracture of left partial end occipital bone. II CRANIUM SPINAL CORD Scaly Skull and vettebrae. Cranial cavity full of blood Subaponeutotic hemorrhage was present all over the scalp. 12 Cms. Fissured fracture of right partial and occipital bones found as shown in photographs craniotomy defect i.e. 30x14 Cms. With five but holes were present on left frontal partial, occipital and temporal bones. Duraplasty was present on left side hemisphere of brain. Subdutal thin layer haemotoma was present all over the brain. Left parieto occipital lobe of brain at superior surface, contusion and laceration 6 x 4.5 c.ms. Was present inttacetebtal hemorrhage was present in left cerebtal hemisphere. Brain was congested. III THORAX 1. Walls ribs and cartilages 2. Pleutac... 3. Larynx and ttachea 4. Right lung 5. Left Lung 6. Pericardium Heart Large vessels NAD NAD NAD Congested Congested Normal Normal Apparently Normal IV- ABDOMEN 1. Walls 2. Peritomeum 3. Mouth, Phatyrix and Oesophagus 4. Stomach and its contents 5. Small intestines and their contents 6. Large intestines and their contents 7. Liver 8. Spleen 9. Kidney 10. Bladder 11. Organs of generation external and internal 12. Organs of generation external and internal NAD NAD NAD Contain about 50mls. Gray colour fluid Contains gases and liquid at places. Contain gases, liquid and fecal metal at places. NAD NAD NAD Hal Full Apparently normal Apparently normal. V. DIESEASE OF DEFORMITY. Liver 8. Spleen 9. Kidney 10. Bladder 11. Organs of generation external and internal 12. Organs of generation external and internal NAD NAD NAD Contain about 50mls. Gray colour fluid Contains gases and liquid at places. Contain gases, liquid and fecal metal at places. NAD NAD NAD Hal Full Apparently normal Apparently normal. V. DIESEASE OF DEFORMITY. Injuries As described. VI OPINION Case of death was shock due to ctanio cetebtal damage as a result of head injuries. The injuries were anti mortem could be as alleged. The weapon used blunt. Probable time that elapsed:- (a) Between injury and death (b) Between death and Post-mortem 5 to 6 days. 8 hours. He records therein an opinion qua the demise of the deceased standing sequled by ctanio cetebtal damage as a result of antemortem head injury. He also deposes of the weapon of offence used by the accused being blunt. He voices therein of 5 to 6 days elapsing since the befallment of the relevant injuries and her death. 12. The ocular version qua the ill fated occurrence deposed PW-1 besides corroborated by PW-6 and PW-10 is lent succor by the deposition of PW-4 qua the injuries manifested in Ex.PW4/B standing begotten on the person of Sunki Devi by user of knife, Ex.P-4 and user of iron pipe Ex.P-3 also with PW-4 deposing qua the time of befallment of the relevant injuries being 12-16 hours hitherto therefrom renders the timing qua the entailment of the relevant injuries sustained by the deceased standing related to the occurrence besides holding synchronity vis-a- vis the timing of the occurrence unfolded in FIR comprised in Ex.PW19/A. In sequel, with connectivity emerging inter se the injuries sustained by the deceased vis-a-vis the occurrence besides the timings thereof unraveled in Ex.PW4/B holding congruity vis-a-vis its timing recited in the FIR Ex.PW19/A renders hence the deposition of PW-1 to stand efficaciously corroborated qua the factum aforesaid. Also with PW-20 in his deposition synchronizing the time vis-a-vis the relevant timings thereof manifested in FIR Ex.PW19/A with aplomb besides with an accentuated vigour stems a firm derivative qua the timing of the incident deposed by PW-20 holding veracity. Also with PW-20 in his deposition synchronizing the time vis-a-vis the relevant timings thereof manifested in FIR Ex.PW19/A with aplomb besides with an accentuated vigour stems a firm derivative qua the timing of the incident deposed by PW-20 holding veracity. Consequently, hence with the deposition of PW-1 attaining a firm pedestal of evidentiary vigour besides with hers handing over knife, Ex.P-4 and pipe Ex.P-3 to the police under memo Ex.PW1/B also with the memo aforesaid standing signatured by the witnesses thereto, both of whom while deposing as PW-2 and PW-5 lend proof qua the recitals occurring in Ex.PW1/B also stirs a deduction of the recitals embodied in Ex.PW1/B standing efficaciously proven whereupon an inference stands erected of the prosecution proving in concurrence with the deposition of PW-1 qua their user by the accused upon the person of the deceased. In aftermath, the rendition of the ocular version qua the occurrence by PW-1 acquires immense potency. 13. Be that as it may, even if PW-8 deposes of on 23.8.2009 his visiting the house of PW-1 whereat accused was also present, who after cessor of rain, departed therefrom whereupon the defence contends of the accused being unavailable on 23.8.2009 at 10 p.m. at the house of PW-1 also when in tandem therewith PW-1 makes an alike communication in her cross-examination the defence counsel makes an espousal of the prosecution case holding no solemnity. Nonetheless, the effect of the communications aforesaid occurring in the testimony of both PW-1 and PW-8 stands withered by PW-1 denying the further suggestion put to her by the defence counsel while holding her to cross-examination of the accused on 23.8.2009 not visiting her house at night. Nonetheless, the effect of the communications aforesaid occurring in the testimony of both PW-1 and PW-8 stands withered by PW-1 denying the further suggestion put to her by the defence counsel while holding her to cross-examination of the accused on 23.8.2009 not visiting her house at night. Also though in her examination-in-chief she deposes of the accused only visiting her house on 23.8.2009 at 10 p.m. hence belying her statement of his visiting her house on the same day at 1.30 p.m where after he on cessor of rain departed therefrom hence tentatively diminishing the veracity of the rendition by her of an ocular account qua the occurrence, yet with the depositions of PW-6 and PW-10 both of whom visited her house on theirs hearing the outcries of PW-1 qua the accused belabouring her mother articulating with unanimity of PW-1 making a disclosure qua the occurrence to them wherein she ascribed an incriminatory role to the accused also of theirs in unanimity deposing of theirs noticing the mother of PW-1 lying in an unconscious condition, depositions whereof of PW-6 and PW-10 remained unshattered qua the aforesaid unfoldments made to them by PW-1, renders the deposition of PW-1 qua the accused visiting her house on 23.8.2009 at 10 p.m. to acquire aggravated momentum preeminently its standing lent vigorous corroboration by PW-6 and PW-10 who had visited her house on 11.00 p.m. on 23.8.2009. No benefit can hence stand drawn by the defence counsel on the minimal contradictions occurring in the testimony of PW-1 nor from the deposition of PW-8 primarily when the preponderant fact of the occurrence taking place at 11 p.m. in the house of PW-1 stands clinchingly proven also when the accused even if he on the same day visited the house PW-1 at 1.30 p.m. (afternoon) wherefrom he departed on cessor of rain, his returning thereto thereafter stands convincingly established by clinching evidence aforesaid. 14. 14. The report of the FSL embedded in Ex.PX unravels of blood standing not detected on knife, shirt and salwar of Sunaki Devi whereas traces of blood standing detected on iron pipe, when analyzed in coalescence with the deposition of PW-1 wherein she voices of the accused wielding a knife, Ex.P-4, occurrence of factum when therein is a per se embellishment arising from the factum of its remaining undivulged by her in Ex.PW1/A yet hence when may render hence her testification qua the accused wielding a knife standing bereft of credibility nonetheless on account thereof her testimony in its entirety cannot suffer the ill fate of its standing eroded of its veracity. Also with PW-1 in her deposition not affirmatively voicing therein qua the accused though wielding a knife his inflicting blows with its user on the person of her mother Sunki Devi, renders inconsequential the effect, if any, of the embellishments qua the communication aforesaid occurring in her examination-in-chief also renders nugatory the reticences in Ex.Px qua detection of traces of blood standing detected thereon to be also nugatory, moreover with PW-20 with omnibus clarity echoing in his deposition qua the cause of demise of the deceased being ascribable to user of blunt weapon, as a corollary, with PW-1 voicing in her testimony of the accused striking her mother with iron pipe, Ex.P-3 whereon blood stains stand reflected in Ex.Px to be occurring thereon facilitates an inference of PW-1 not contriving the factum of its user by the accused upon the person of her mother Sunki Devi. Moreover, with its user standing linked with the cause of demise of the deceased as stand expostulated by PW-20, the rendition of an ocular account by PW-1 qua the occurrence wherein she ascribes its user by the accused upon the person of her deceased mother being amenable to be construed to be not bereft of credence. 15. The summom bonum of the above discussion is of the prosecution unflinchingly proving the factum of the accused by user of iron pipe begetting the demise of Sunaki Devi, the mother of PW-1. 16. 15. The summom bonum of the above discussion is of the prosecution unflinchingly proving the factum of the accused by user of iron pipe begetting the demise of Sunaki Devi, the mother of PW-1. 16. The learned trial Court though aptly concluded qua the demise of Sunki Devi standing begotten by user of iron pipe, Ex.P-3 upon her person by the accused, yet it on flimsy grounds omitted to record an order of conviction against the accused for his committing an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC. The reason which stands assigned by the learned trial Court to record an order of conviction against the accused under Section 304(Part II) of the IPC stands founded upon (a) the accused not proceeding to the house of PW-1 while wielding or holding the relevant weapon of offence and (b) with PW-1 articulating in her deposition of hers on over hearing the quarrel which erupted inter se her deceased mother and the accused, hers proceeding to a room other than the one which stood occupied by her whereat she noticed of the accused belabouring her mother with iron pipe, Ex.P-3, it concluded of in a sudden duel, bereft of the accused holding the relevant mensrea to murder the deceased delivering blows with the relevant weapon of offence on the person of deceased Sunaki Devi. Also it concluded of the suddenness of eruption of a quarrel inter se the accused and the deceased per se making the penal misdemeanor of the accused to stand constituted within the ambit of the statutory exceptions to the offence of murder. 17. Both the aforesaid reasons assigned qua the factum aforesaid by the learned trial Court are specious as well as flimsy. The learned trial Court has untenably in detraction of the solemn tenet of criminal jurisprudence concluded of the proven factum of the accused wielding a weapon of offence while his proceeding to the house of PW-1 constituting the sine qua non for fastening penal in culpability qua his committing an offence constituted under Section 302 of the IPC given his thereupon hence holding the relevant mensrea. However, with PW-1 testifying of both her parents refusing to give her hands in marriage to the accused leads to an inference of the accused striving in the relevant room which he occupied along with the mother of PW-1 to re-attempt to secure the hands in marriage of PW-1, endeavour whereof standing re-spurned by PW-1 sprouting a quarrel inter se both. Consequently, when the aspiration of the accused to marry PW-1 stood frustrated, it obviously invited his wrath, for unleashing whereof he picked up an iron pipe. Since, the proceeding of the accused to the house of PW-1 with the aforesaid concert also with his thereat hoping qua his achieving success in his mission, naturally then he would not while his proceeding from his house to the house of PW-1 hold any weapon of offence. Since, the genesis of the quarrel which erupted inter se him and the mother of the deceased stands rested by this Court, the natural deduction there from is of the accused instantaneously rearing a mensrea to murder the deceased. Given the instantaneousness qua the rearing of the relevant mensrea by the accused to murder the deceased it was untenable for the learned trial Court to dispel the instantaneousness of its hence spurring thereat also it was inapt for the learned trial Court to conclude of there being any enjoined holding by the accused of the relevant mensrea from the moment when he proceeded from his house to the house of PW-1 for hence its standing constrained to not render a befitting conclusion of the accused standing convicted for the charge under Section 302 of the IPC. Also with the ready availability of iron pipe at the site of occurrence provided the incendiary striking material to the accused to accomplish his mensrea of murdering the deceased, as a corollary, it was wholly unnecessary for the learned trial Court to conclude of given its not standing carried by the accused from his house uptill the house of PW-1 rendered him unamenable to face conviction under Section 302 of the IPC, preponderantly when the relevant mensrea for the reasons aforesaid erupted suddenly at the site of occurrence. 18. 18. Furthermore, the learned trial Court has fallaciously concluded in gross detraction of the statutory exceptions qua the amenability of the accused to face conviction for the charge of murder besides in gross misappreciation of the testimony of PW-1, who echoes therein qua the eruption of a quarrel inter se both, the accused and her mother whereupon per se the learned trial Court unwarrantedly concluded therefrom of the accused being amenable for conviction under Section 304 (Part II) of the IPC, more so when the inherent fallacy qua both the facets aforesaid upsurges on account of it remaining unmindful qua the prime factum of the purpose aforesaid of the accused to visit the house of PW-1 also arises from its slighting the effect of the evocative infuriation besetting the mind of the accused on the deceased spurning his offer to marry PW-1 with him. Resultantly, when in the quarrel, if any, which erupted inter se both, the quantum of infuriation nursed by the accused was proportionally higher vis-a-vis the deceased also given the gender inequalities of both besides difference in age of both, leaving hence the deceased incapacitated to match the prowess of the accused rather when the accused departed from the house of PW-1 on the latter raising outcries for inviting thereat the presence of co-villagers prompts a derivative of the accused holding an prowess outmatching both of PW-1 besides her mother, both of whom were evidently unarmed at the relevant time, rendering the fatal aggression of the accused upon the deceased while his standing armed with the relevant weapons of offence to squarely fall within the domain of an offence constituted outside the exceptions to Section 302 of the IPC. The suddenness of the quarrel which erupted inter se both whereupon benefit of the statutory exception qua the unamenability of the accused to face conviction under Section 302 of the IPC was available to be capitalized by the accused would occur only when both he and the deceased were of an akin gender also with both holding similar physical prowess besides both being armed, whereas all the facets aforesaid are amiss hereat, renders a conclusion of the relevant benefit being unavailable to be marshaled by the accused. The mere factum of occurrence of a quarrel inter se the accused and the deceased was insufficient to construe of either the relevant striking by the accused upon the deceased with the relevant weapon of offence being in a heat of moment in a sudden quarrel also with there existing no evidence qua the striking of the deceased by the accused with the relevant weapon of offence standing engendered by a sudden provocation purveyed to him by the deceased also disables the accused to capitalize upon the relevant benefit of the statutory exception qua his unamenability to face conviction under Section 302 of the IPC. Reinforcingly, vigour to the factum aforesaid stands lent by postmortem reported comprised in Ex.PW20/B, postmortem report whereof echoing therein qua the demise of the deceased standing sequelled by head injury. Since the ocular account qua the occurrence rendered by PW-1 bespeaks of the accused striking her mother, in sequel whereof she fell unconscious connects the opinion of PW-20 recorded inEx.PW20/B with the testification of PW-1 also hence with the accused striking a vital portion of the body of the deceased renders him amenable for his being construed to be holding the relevant mensrea to murder the deceased. Consequently, this Court is constrained to dis-concur with the findings of the conviction recorded by the learned trial Court under Section 304 (Part II) of the IPC vis-a-vis the accused. 19. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The accused/respondent is convicted under Section 302 of the IPC. Accordingly, the judgment of the learned trial Court stands modified. Let the convict/respondent be heard on quantum of sentence on 10th August, 2016.