ORDER 1. The present appeal filed by accused-appellant, Suresh Dnyandeo Kate (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') arises from the judgment and order dated 13.03.2014 passed by Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 719 of 2009, whereby the appeal was dismissed. The conviction from the Trial Court was upheld, whereby the appellant was convicted under section 302 IPC[IPC- Indian Penal Code, 1860] and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.500/-. FACTS: 2. The case of the prosecution is that appellant married Vidya (deceased) and had two children, Viraj and Manali. The appellant was working as a priest in Hanuman temple and later on he started selling Vada-Pav outside Jayashree Talkies. Both the husband and wife were suspecting each other of having an illicit relation which was the reason of frequent quarrels between them. 3. On 24.11.2005, the appellant brutally assaulted his wife with an iron rod which had a pointed edge (generally used for breaking coconut). At the time of the assault, the minor son and the daughter were sleeping inside the same house. They woke up as they heard their mother scream and saw their father hitting their mother. After this the appellant went to his sister's house, after locking the door from outside. In the meantime, the daughter made a phone call to her maternal uncle, Uddhav and informed him that her mother is lying in a pool of blood and her father has locked them inside the house. After this the appellant came back with his sister who took both the children to her house and Vidya was taken to YCM Hospital by the appellant. 4. PSI Dattatraya Falle (PW8) who was on night duty at Nigdi Police Station, received information about admission of Vidya (deceased) in YMC Hospital. On reaching the Hospital, he was informed that Vidya had succumbed to her injuries. Father of the deceased, Anandrao Takawane (PW1) lodged a complaint and FIR being Crime No. 451 of 2005 was registered. Crime was initially investigated by PSI Falle. He drew the inquest panchanama of dead body of Vidya in the presence of panchas and then the dead body was referred for post-mortem examination. 5. On the day of the incident itself, the appellant was arrested. The appellant had certain injuries on him and, therefore, he was sent to YCM Hospital for examination. He drew the inquest panchanama of dead body of Vidya in the presence of panchas and then the dead body was referred for post-mortem examination. 5. On the day of the incident itself, the appellant was arrested. The appellant had certain injuries on him and, therefore, he was sent to YCM Hospital for examination. After examination, following external injuries were noticed on the appellant by Dr. Arvind Patil (PW 7): 'i) Lineal abrasion over left side of forehead at half line tapering upward oblique 3 cm in length. Nape of neck horizontal 8 cm in length tapering towards left, left leg upper third vertical 8 cm in length tapering downwards, semi solid jelly like discharge present on the edge of injury. ii) Small abrasion over right scapular region four in numbers of 3 cm x 3 cm size, on left scapular region three in number 3 cm x 3 cm size with thick serious discharge. iii) Abrasion over left hand extensor aspect 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm.' The doctor was of the opinion that the age of injury was within 12 to 25 hours and the injuries may have been caused by a pointed object. The other injuries were due to hard and blunt object. 6. The investigation was then transferred to PI Eknath Patil (PW 9), who seized the blood-stained clothes of the appellant in presence of panchas and recorded the statement of the children of the deceased and other witnesses. During investigation, the appellant took the police and the panchas to a place called Mahadu Gavade Chawl and produced the weapon used in the crime which had been concealed beneath the tree. 7. Post-mortem of the dead body was performed by Dr. Bal Ughade (PW 6), who noticed the following external injuries - '1. Contusion over right knee joint 1 cm circular in shape. 2. Multiple abrasion over left knee joint. 3. CLW right middle finger at nail bed' Following injuries were noticed over the scalp - ' 1. CLW over left eyebrow horizontal 3 x 1/2 cm. 2. CLW over right frontal bone oblique 2 cm x 1/2 cm. 3. CLW right frontal bone immediately left to injury No., 2.4 x 1 cm. 4. CLW right frontal immediately left to injury No.3, 3.5 x 1 cm oblique. 5. CLW frontal bone 2.5 cm horizontal. 6. CLW over left eyebrow horizontal 3 x 1/2 cm. 2. CLW over right frontal bone oblique 2 cm x 1/2 cm. 3. CLW right frontal bone immediately left to injury No., 2.4 x 1 cm. 4. CLW right frontal immediately left to injury No.3, 3.5 x 1 cm oblique. 5. CLW frontal bone 2.5 cm horizontal. 6. CLW frontal bone left side near to injury no.5 oblique 4 x 2 cm. 7. CLW parietal bone left side near to injury no.6, 5.5 x 2 cm. 8. CLW parietal, bone left side, Jatera/ to injury no.7, vertical 3 x 1.5 cm. 9. CLW parietal bone left side above left eyebrow oblique 3 x 1 cm. 10. CLW left parietal bone, oblique 4 x 2 cm. 11. CLW left parietal bone, oblique 4 x 2 cm. 12. CLW left parietal bone, oblique 3 x 1 cm, Injury Nos. 10 to 12 were 7 cm over left ear. 13. Left temporal bone horizontal 4.5 x 1 cm. 14. Immediately near to injury No.13, 4 x 1 cm oblique. 15. At occipital bone lambdoid point 6 x 1/2 cm. 16. Lateral to injury no.15 vertical 5 x 1/2 cm. 17. Lateral to injury no. 15 right side 5 x 1/2 cm. 18. At parietal right side, horizontal 7 x 14 cm.' 8. Dr. Bal Ughade was of the opinion that injuries 1 to 18 were noticed like incised injuries and were bone deep. He had noticed a fracture of the skull from bone 1.5 cm long on the left side and on the right side 18 cm long. He was of the view that all the injuries were ante-mortem and that the cause of death was due to head injury with fracture to skull with multiple injuries over scalp and intra cranial bleeding. 9. Charge framed against the appellant was for an offence punishable under section 302 IPC. The prosecution examined nine witnesses as PW1 to PW9 and also filed documentary evidence. After the evidence by the prosecution was recorded, the appellant was examined under section 313 CrPC[CrPC - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973] and the entire incriminating material was put to him. He denied all allegations against him and reiterated his innocence at first but later on took the plea of unsound mind while committing the murder. The appellant examined four witnesses in his defence as DW 1 to DW 4. 10. He denied all allegations against him and reiterated his innocence at first but later on took the plea of unsound mind while committing the murder. The appellant examined four witnesses in his defence as DW 1 to DW 4. 10. The only issue pressed before us is that the benefit of Section 84 IPC should be extended to the appellant in view of the evidence on record. According to the learned counsel, the appellant was suffering from mental illness and was thus incapable of knowing the nature of the act committed by him. 11. The Trial Court, while convicting the appellant, had rejected the plea of Section 84 IPC. It was of the opinion that the defence though has established that the accused was suffering from mental illness in 2001, but there is no evidence to show that he was suffering from severe attack of insanity at the time of the incident. Further, while deliberating his action after the incident - he went outside, locked the door from outside and came back along with his sister. He then sent his children to sister's house and took his injured wife to the hospital. All these actions manifest that he was well within his senses and aware about the act he has committed. Furthermore, he was also sensible enough to hide the weapon. 12. The High Court while refusing to grant the benefit of section 84 IPC to the appellant, held that he has failed to establish a history of mental ailment of psychiatric illness in the family, thereby not able to prove the hereditary aspect of the mental illness. Further with regard to the point that the appellant was undergoing treatment since 2001, there are no records to prove that the treatment was continuing and he was taking any treatment till the time of the incident. Furthermore, nothing has been put on record to show that at the time of the incident the appellant was incapable of knowing the nature of the act which he was committing. Rather, as per the deposition of PW3 (Vijay, minor son of the accused), who clearly stated that he (his father) was sane and had carefully taken a decision and had latched the door from outside and had brought his sister. Rather, as per the deposition of PW3 (Vijay, minor son of the accused), who clearly stated that he (his father) was sane and had carefully taken a decision and had latched the door from outside and had brought his sister. Relevant paragraph from the judgment of the High Court is reproduced below: 'Para 25: In the present case, the Appellant has not been able to establish the history of mental ailment or psychiatric illness in the family. The Appellant has not been able to establish the hereditary aspect of the mental illness. Though D.W.3 -Pushpa has claimed that her brother i.e. the brother of the Appellant was also undergoing similar treatment, yet no papers had been produced by the Appellant to establish this fact. The Appellant had been taking treatment in 2001 and thereafter there is no record to indicate that the Appellant was taking any treatment till the time of the incident. There is absolutely no reliable evidence regarding the conduct or behaviour of the Appellant just before the incident, at the time of the incident and immediately thereafter. A vain attempt has been made by the Appellant in the examination of D.W.3 - Pushpa. The, conduct of the Appellant on the previous day which is deposed by D.W.3 -Pushpa had not been put to either P.W.1 - Anandrao, P.W.2 - Udhav or even to P.W.4 - Viraj the son of the Appellant. Thus, there is nothing on the record to even remotely indicate that at the time of the incident, the Appellant was incapable of knowing the nature of the act which he was committing. In fact, the behaviour of the Appellant as is deposed by P.W.3 - Vijay certainly indicates that the Appellant was sane and had carefully taken a decision and had latched the door from outside and had brought his sister. The Appellant therefore was not at that point of time affected by any mental ailment which had affected his faculties to an extent that the Appellant was incapable of understanding the nature of the act which he was committing.' 13. We have gone through the material evidence on record and we agree with the concurrent findings of both the courts below on the above issue. The action of the accused after the incident clearly indicate that he was capable of knowing and understanding the nature of the act. We have gone through the material evidence on record and we agree with the concurrent findings of both the courts below on the above issue. The action of the accused after the incident clearly indicate that he was capable of knowing and understanding the nature of the act. He was well aware that if convicted he would be imprisoned and hence, he tried to hide the evidence, i.e., the iron rod with which he assaulted his wife. He was conscious of the fact that he has done something unlawful and hence locked the door from outside when he went to meet his sister. Even after he brought his sister back to his home, he sent both his children to his sister's house and then he took his wife to hospital. The whole chain of events indicates that the accused was of sound mind and capable of understanding his actions while committing the offence. 14. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the appeal, which consequently stands dismissed.