P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.

The conviction and sentence ordered by the Trial Court awarding life imprisonment and imposing a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs in respect of 'uxoricide' committed by the appellant attracting the offence under Section 302 IPC is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal. The ground for interference raised is Section 84 of the IPC, with reference to unsoundness of mind.

2. The prosecution case is that the appellant, on the fateful day i.e., on 23.02.2009, who was sleeping in the previous night with his wife in the bed room of their residential building, inflicted several stab injuries upon his wife Shiny with intention to cause death, at about 6.30 a.m. The stab injuries so inflicted on various parts of the body and in particular, to her neck with a rubber tapping knife were quite sufficient in the ordinary course to have caused death. Wife of the appellant succumbed to the injuries on the same day and the motive for causing death is the 'doubted chastity' of the wife. The incident was reported to the police by the appellant himself at about 8.30 a.m. on the same day. Based on the information furnished and that he had kept the key of the room, (which was locked by the appellant after the incident) at a particular place in the house, the appellant was left in surveillance at the police station and authenticity of the information was got verified by the ASI. After confirming the position and after informing the higher authorities, he came back to the police station, arrested the accused and on questioning, it was stated that the appellant/accused had kept the knife on the top of the Almirah and that if he was taken to the house, he will retrieve it and hand over the same. Based on the information, the recovery was effected. The inquest and such other formalities were completed, the witnesses were questioned and after completing the investigation, final report was submitted before the Judl. First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Thamarassery. On committing the offence to the Sessions Court as per order dated 06.10.2010 in C.P. 22/2010 in terms of Section 207 of the Cr.P.C., the case was numbered and later, it was made over to the First Addl. Sessions Court, where the trial was conducted.

3. The prosecution examined 20 witnesses as P.Ws. 1 to 20 and Exts.P1 to P20 were marked, besides producing M.Os 1 to 13 series. D.W.1 was examined from the part of the appellant/accused and 4 documents were produced and marked as Exts.D1 to D4. On conclusion of the trial, the Trial Court found the accused guilty under Section 302 IPC and was convicted and sentenced accordingly, as per the verdict passed on 09.03.2011. The Trial Court brushed aside the plea/defence of insanity, holding that there was nothing on record to show that the accused was suffering from insanity at the time of commission of the offence, to get the benefit of Section 84 of the IPC. After hearing the appellant/accused on the next day, on the question of sentence, the Trial Court spared 'death sentence' and inflicted punishment of 'imprisonment for life' and a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs, in default of which, to have rigorous imprisonment for 'two years' under Section 302 IPC; simultaneously allowing set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. This is under challenge in this appeal.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and Smt. S. Ambika Devi, the learned Spl. Government Pleader/Public Prosecutor for offences against women and children, at length. Though there is no much dispute with regard to the evidence on record as to the involvement and commission of offence, but for claiming the benefit of Section 84 of the IPC, this Court finds it fit and proper to have all the materials on record subjected to scrutiny, it being a murder case.

5. As mentioned already, the case was registered 'suo motu' by the Police on coming to know about occurrence of the crime. P.W.1 is a neighbour by name Shaji, who deposed before the Court as to the occurrence of the incident on 2