JUDGMENT : MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA, J. 1. Heard Mr. Johny L. Tochhawng, the learned Amicus Curiae. Also heard Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, Addl. Public Prosecutor. 2. The present appeal has been filed against the Judgment dated 20.04.2016 and sentence order dated 22.04.2016, passed by the Court of the Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Aizawl in Criminal Trial No. 271/2015, whereby the appellant had been convicted under Section 304 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo seven years R.I with a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default two months S.I. 3. The prosecution story of the case in brief is that on 11.09.2014, at around 6:10 AM, a written FIR was submitted by Lallawmkima, S/o Rokunga (L), Resident of Bilkhawthlir Kualmawi, to the effect that his uncle Vanlalthaa, (48 years) had been stabbed by the appellant on 10.09.2014 at around 7:00 PM and as a result of which, the victim Vanlalthaa expired on the way to the PHC, Bilkhawthlir. Vairengte P.S Case No. 51/2014 dated 11.09.2014 under Section 302 I.P.C. was registered and investigated. 4. After charge sheet was submitted, charge under Section 302 I.P.C. was framed against the appellant on 19.03.2015. The appellant during the consideration of charge pleaded guilty to the charge of stabbing the deceased who had succumbed to his injury. The appellant admitted that he had beaten the victim by mistake as the victim used to steal his eggs. 5. The Trial Court examined as many as nine prosecution witnesses and one defense witness. The Trial Court also took into consideration the confessional statement of the appellant made under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 12.09.2014, in which the appellant admitted to having stabbed the deceased in his left rib cage. After examining the appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant to 7 (seven) years R.I with a fine of Rs. 2000/- i.d. S.I. for two months. 6. The learned Amicus Curiae submits that the impugned Judgment dated 20.04.2016 should be set aside as the Trial Court came to a finding of guilt against the appellant, in the absence of any FSL report, with regard to the bloodstains on the weapon (knife) and the blood stains found on the garments. He also submits that the appellant had been falsely framed in the present case, as the deceased was killed in the house of one Khawlremthanga, with whose wife the appellant was allegedly having an affair. He also submits that the appellant had been falsely framed in the present case, as the deceased was killed in the house of one Khawlremthanga, with whose wife the appellant was allegedly having an affair. 7. The Addl. Public Prosecutor on the other hand, submits that the appellant, during framing of charge and in his confessional statement admitted to having stabbed the deceased. The Addl. Public Prosecutor also submits that under Section 313 Cr.P.C. is to the effect that the appellant does not remember if he had stabbed the victim as he was heavily drunk. The Addl. Public Prosecutor also submits that the evidence of PW 2 and PW 3, who is the eye witness, is to the effect that the appellant had stabbed the deceased. The Addl. Public Prosecutor thus submits that the appeal petition is without any merit and the same should be dismissed. 8. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 9. The appellant during the framing of charge has stated that he beat the victim by mistake as he used to steal his eggs. The confessional statement of the appellant under Section 164 is reproduced below:- “Vanlalthaa (48) of Bilkhawthlir is a friend of mine. We used to drink liquor together. I breed chicken and I have three layer that lays eggs. Vanlalthaa would however steal these eggs of mine. When I asked him why he would eat it up he would deny saying that it must have been the mouse. My eggs would disappear in this manner. One day, an egg went missing again and we started arguing. He punched me on my right eyebrow and I still have the injury today. When he punched me, we were inside my home. I was busy cutting the vegetables. The moment he punched me, he rushed outside and entered the home of Mr. Kawlremthanga which was about the third house from my home. As I was deeply angered, I ran after him carrying my kitchen knife with me. I called Vanlalthaa to come out of the house. As he refused, I entered the house and then stabbed him on his left rib cage while he was standing still.” 10. The statement made by the appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. is basically to the effect that he did not remember the incident that had happened the night before, as he was fully drunk. 11. As he refused, I entered the house and then stabbed him on his left rib cage while he was standing still.” 10. The statement made by the appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. is basically to the effect that he did not remember the incident that had happened the night before, as he was fully drunk. 11. The evidence of PW-2 is to the effect that while the deceased came to the house of PW-2 to buy cigarette and pan, the appellant, who had subsequently come to the shop charged the appellant with having stolen two of his eggs. PW-2 then states that the appellant thereafter grabbed hold of the deceased and stabbed him with a knife on his left side. PW-2 further states in his evidence that he pushed the appellant out of his house and told him that he was displeased by what he did in his house. He also stated that the appellant stated that he would not make any complaint if anything happened to him. PW-2 thereafter, looked after the deceased, while blood was spurting out from his wound. He also states that his wife Lalkhumi and Lallawmawma took the deceased with an Auto Rickshaw to the PHC but the deceased died on the way. The evidence given by PW-2 in his examination-in-chief is clarified by PW-2 as follows:- “Lalvanneiha came to our house while my wife went to our shop getting cigarette and a pack of paan. My wife arrived before me at the place where Lalvanneiha and Lalthaa were there. I was watching T.V when the incident took place, I was not an eye witness. My wife told me of the incident so I went over there and pushed Lalvanneiha outside. When he came inside, Lalvanneiha wrapped a gamchha around his loin, I did not see him holding a knife. I do not agree that Lalvanneiha did not stab Lalthaa.” 12. The evidence of PW-3 is reproduced below:- “I know the accused Lalvanneiha, he is my neighbour, there are three houses in between his and ours. On the night of 10.9.2014, Vanlalthaa (Tha-a) came to our house after dinner which was around 7 pm. We watched T.V altogether, while we were watching T.V. accused Lalvanneiha called Vanlalthaa from outside again and again, he asked him to go out from our house and even wagged his fingers at him. On the night of 10.9.2014, Vanlalthaa (Tha-a) came to our house after dinner which was around 7 pm. We watched T.V altogether, while we were watching T.V. accused Lalvanneiha called Vanlalthaa from outside again and again, he asked him to go out from our house and even wagged his fingers at him. The accused was accusing Vanlalthaa of stealing two eggs from him. Vanlalthaa told the accused 'I did not steal your eggs/I did not take them'. Accused Lalvanneiha came inside our house, he did not wear a shirt and wrapped a gamchha around his loin. He clutched Vanlalthaa who was sitting, Vanlalthaa cried out to my husband U. Thang, he was holding a knife'. My husband and I quickly went near them, Vanlalthaa was already collapsing. The accused tried to stab him again and my husband held him back. I wrenched the knife from his hand and threw it over the downhill side of our house. The accused stabbed Vanlalthaa on his left side. After the incident, I called Vanlalthaa's nephew, Lalawmawma and we took Vanlalthaa to a hospital. He died on our way to the hospital. Accused Lalvanneiha has always been very cruel.” 13. The evidence of the Doctor, PW-8 shows that the deceased had cut injuries and that there was laceration of upper and lower lobes of the left lung, with collection of approximately 2 litres of blood in the chest cavity. Injury to the left lung led to the death of the deceased. 14. The evidence of the I.O. is basically to the effect that the weapon used in office was seized and after examining the witnesses and the accused, a prima facie under Section 302 was found well established against the appellant. 15. The evidence of the lone defense witness, DW-1 is to the effect that the deceased was having an affair with the wife of one Khawlremthanga, in whose house the incident took place. 16. The appellants defense of not re-collecting anything due to him being fully drunk cannot absolve him of the crime, in view of the fact that there is nothing to show that the thing that intoxicated the appellant was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will. 17. Section 86 of the I.P.C. states as follows:- “86. 16. The appellants defense of not re-collecting anything due to him being fully drunk cannot absolve him of the crime, in view of the fact that there is nothing to show that the thing that intoxicated the appellant was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will. 17. Section 86 of the I.P.C. states as follows:- “86. Offence requiring a particular intent or knowledge committed by one who is intoxicated - In cases where an act done is not an offence unless done with a particular knowledge or intent, a person who does the act in a state of intoxication shall be liable to be dealt with as if he had the same knowledge as he would have had if he had not been intoxicated, unless the thing which intoxicated him was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will.” 18. In the case of Rajkumar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2014 (5) SCC 353 , the Apex Court has held that in the event of complete denial, silence and non explanation of incriminating materials, Court would be entitled to draw an adverse inference against the accused, as may be permissible in law. In the present case, the admission of guilt by the appellant during the framing of charge, his confessional statement, statement of eye witness, PW-3 all point to the guilt of the appellant. His silence and denial of the incident, while being examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. coupled with the other evidence stated above, points to the guilt of the appellant in the death of the deceased. However, as rightly held by the learned Trial Court, the offence does not come under Section 302 I.P.C. and it comes under Section 304 I.P.C. due to the facts and circumstances of this case. 19. In that view of the matter, this Court finds no infirmity with the conviction of the appellant. However, keeping in mind that the appellant was 62 years old at the time of the incident and the provocation caused to the appellant and the fact that the appellant has never been involved in a case of this nature, this Court modifies the sentence order dated 22.04.2016 passed by the Addl. Session Judge, Aizawl and convicts the appellant to undergo R.I for a period of six years with a fine of Rs. 2000/- i.d. S.I for two months. 20. Session Judge, Aizawl and convicts the appellant to undergo R.I for a period of six years with a fine of Rs. 2000/- i.d. S.I for two months. 20. The Judgment dated 20.04.2016 passed by the Addl. Session Judge, Aizawl in Criminal Trial No. 271/2015 under Section 304 I.P.C. is hereby up held. 21. The sentence order dated 22.04.2016 is however modified to the extent indicated above. 22. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. 23. In view of the assistance rendered by Mr. Johny L. Tochhawng, learned Amicus Curiae, his fee is fixed at 7500/- per month, which shall be paid by the State Legal Services Authority. 24. Send back the LCR.