Insanity defence under Section 84 rejected absent proof of legal incapacity at offence time; conviction under Section 304 Part I upheld on complete circumstantial chain establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.

1. Heard Mr Thombre, learned Advocate (appointed) for the appellant and the learned APP for the respondent/State.

2. Challenge in this appeal to the judgment dated 03-01-2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed in Sessions Case No. 89/2016 by which the accused was convicted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 304 Part-I of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [in short ‘IPC’] and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default, the accused was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 days.

3. In short, it is the case of the prosecution that on 30-04- 2016, when the informant/PW-1, who was the father of the accused, was sitting in front of his house, the accused questioned him as to why he was chewing tobacco and assaulted him by stick on the leg. At which time, mother-in-law of PW-1/grand mother of the accused scolded the accused and then accused brought the axe from the house and assaulted the grand-mother on the head due to which she fell in pool of the blood.

4. This incident led to the initiation of criminal proceedings, but not to the immediate registration of the First Information Report. It was PW-8-Gajanan, API attached to the Pimpalner Police Station, who was on patrolling duty that day. He received a phone call from the Pimpalner Police Station that a murder had taken place at Ghodka Rajuri. Therefore, he took the station diary entry upon arriving at the police station and went to the spot. At the scene, he found a crowd gathered in front of the house and learned that it belonged to PW-1. He then informed his superior.

5. PW-8 on the spot found the corpus of a female, and thereafter he prepared an inquest panchanama, which was proved below Exh. 21. The corpus was forwarded for postmortem to the Civil Hospital, Beed and even a letter to that effect was issued, which was below Exh. 20.

6. Finally, as per the case of the prosecution on 01-05- 2016, PW-1 came to the police station and lodged the first information report. His complaint was below Exh. 63. The lodgment of the complaint resulted in the arrest of the accused on 01-05-2016, and the arrest panchanama was proved below Exh. 66 by PW-8.

7. The investigation was carried out, clothes were seized, witness statements recorded, and the stained clothes and the axe were forwarded for chemical examination. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed, and, since the trial court found a prima facie case, the charge was framed against the accused below Exh. 12/C on 27-03-2017 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 302 and 323 of the IPC.

8. The record of the case shows that on 31-01-2017 the learned Sessions Judge, Beed, ordered the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Beed to comply with the order dated 04-01-2017 which was for referring the accused for medical examination. By order dated 31- 01-2017, it was further directed that the Superintendent of District Prison, Beed,to produce the accused before the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Beed, with prior appointment. On 10-03-2017, the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed had observed that the accused No. 1 had complaints of unsoundness of mind since long. The Civil Surgeon had filed a certificate dated 13-02-2017, which shows that the accused was examined by th