JUDGMENT : Ajit Singh, J. Appellant Bircha Bhengra has been convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/- with default stipulation for committing the murder of his mother Pendo Bhengra, aged 49 years. 2. According to the prosecution case, on 24.5.2008 around 8 PM, the appellant dealt 2/3 blows with a stick to his mother in their house due to which she died on the early hours of 25.5.2008. The incident took place because Pendo Bhengra was addicted to alcohol and by her behaviour, she became a nuisance in the house. On 24.5.2008 also at the time of incident the unbecoming behavior of Pendo Bhengra infuriated the appellant so much that in a heat of passion he dealt 2/3 blows with a stick to her. Ejahar of the incident was lodged by Dominik Bhengra (PW 1) at Police Out Post Salnibari, District Tezpur. He is father of appellant and husband of deceased Pendo Bhengra. 3. Dr. Munin Chandra Pujari (PW 7) conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Pendo Bhengra. He found the following injuries on the dead body:- “One lacerated wound, over right temporal region 1” x ½” x 1 placed transversely and bruises over right maxilla. Fracture left on 5th& 6th rib in front with ecchymosis. Laceration of the parietal pleurae on left side with collection of blood. Laceration of left lower lobe of left lung. Bruises over left upper quadrant and collection of blood in the peritoneum. On the scalp, skull and vertebrae 2” x 1” x 1” lacerated wound over right occipital with fracture skull deep to the wound and a linear tear of the spleen 1” x 1/2” over outer surface of spleen with collection of blood.” 4. The post mortem examination report of Dr. Munin Chandra Pujari is Exhibit P2 and according to his opinion injuries were ante mortem in nature and cause of death of Pendu was due to shock and hemorrhage because of injuries sustained. 5. During trial, most of the witnesses did not support the prosecution case and turned hostile. The trial court however believed the confession exhibit 11 of the appellant recorded by Binod Kumar Chetry (PW 9), Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (Sadar), Tezpur. The statement of confession of appellant reads as under:- “At about 9 a.m., last Saturday, I sat down to have rice. The trial court however believed the confession exhibit 11 of the appellant recorded by Binod Kumar Chetry (PW 9), Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (Sadar), Tezpur. The statement of confession of appellant reads as under:- “At about 9 a.m., last Saturday, I sat down to have rice. My mother entered the kitchen in an inebriated state. When I asked my mother why she had been doing so every day, she replied – “why do you bother ?” I got angry and upon picking up a stick, I dealt three strokes to my mother (with the stick). I went out of the kitchen. My mother was alright then. The following morning, I came to know that my mother had died in the morning. We lived in the same house. My mother used to consume alcohol by selling rice, lentil etc. which were purchased by us. Father and I work while my younger brother studies in school. My sister stays at home. My mother used to consume alcohol by purchasing alcohol with the money kept in the house. She used to raise hue and cry. She used to rebuke us if we said something to her. At times, we had to starve since rice was sold. Even that day i.e. Saturday, she consumed alcohol by selling rice and when she raised a hue and cry at the time of having rice, I beat her out of anger. I did not beat my mother with an intention to kill her. But she died. I did not know in which part of her body, the stokes fell. She fell asleep that night and in the following morning I learnt that she had died. My mother was suffering from a disease which resulted into frequent falling down.” 6. Binod Kumar Chetry has testified that he had recorded the confession of appellant strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. We, therefore, find no good ground to disbelieve the confession of appellant regarding causing the death of his mother Pendo Bhengra by inflicting injuries to her with a stick. The confession of appellant also stands substantially corroborated by the post mortem examination report. We accordingly confirm the finding of the trial court that appellant alone was the perpetrator of the crime. 7. The confession of appellant also stands substantially corroborated by the post mortem examination report. We accordingly confirm the finding of the trial court that appellant alone was the perpetrator of the crime. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant has, however, argued that even accepting the prosecution case in totality, it cannot be said that appellant had the intention to murder his mother Pendo Bhengra and as such, the offence will not be under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, but under Part I or Part II of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. We find sufficient force in this submission. The incident took place suddenly when Pendo Bhengra entered the kitchen in a drunken condition where the appellant was sitting to have his meal. The appellant had even asked Pendo Bhengra why she was behaving in such a manner to which she did not respond properly. Having regard to the circumstances, in which the incident took place, particularly the act of appellant, we are unable to believe that he had any intention to cause the death of Pendo Bhengra. It can, however, be safely held that he had the knowledge that by causing injuries to Pendo with a stick, the latter would die. 8. Consequently, we set aside the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of life imprisonment awarded to him and instead, convict him under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and award a sentence of 7 years rigorous imprisonment. The sentence of fine is however affirmed. The appellant is in jail and he be released on his undergoing the jail sentence awarded by us. 9. With the above modification, the appeal is partly allowed.