The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of a mentally ill accused to the benefit under Section 84 of IPC and the legal provisions for handling foreign prisoners acquitted on the ground of unsoundness of mind.

JUDGMENT :

A. Hariprasad, J.

1. Appellant is tried and convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge for offences under Sections 324 and 302 of IPC. For the offence under Section 324 of IPC he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and for the offence under Section 302 of IPC, he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. Feeling aggrieved, conviction and sentence are challenged in this appeal.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

3. In the course of hearing, we came across certain materials indicating that the appellant is entitled to claim the benefit under Section 84 of IPC. In the final report as well as in the court charge it is mentioned that the appellant is native of Myanmar (formerly Burma). In other words, the appellant is a foreigner who got involved in a case of murder. Since we entertained a doubt regarding the manner in which the appellant has to be handled if we find that he is entitled to get the benefit under Section 84 of IPC, we impleaded the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Union of India as an additional party to this case.

4. We heard the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India too.

5. The charge framed by the Sessions Judge reads as follows:-

"I V.G. Anilkumar, B.Sc.LLB., I Addl. Sessions Judge, Ernakulam hereby charge you:

Thomas, aged 31,

S/o. Kangnauge,

Penitapen village,

Paletwa Township,

Myanmar(Burma)

The accused in the above case as below:-

That on 14/4/2011 at 5.30 am in the upper floor of the building having door No. 32/1194(B) by name Sharunikethan at the place Palarivattom you intentionally caused death by inflicting blow with cement block on the head and face and by beating with iron pine on different parts of the body of Joseph and you committed the offence u/s. 302 IPC.

That in the same transaction you voluntarily caused hurt to Joseph by beating with iron pipe on different parts of the body and thereby you committed the offence u/s. 324 IPC and the aforesaid offences being within cognizance of Sessions Court.

And, I hereby direct that you be tried for the said offences before this court.

Dated this the 26th July, 2013."

6. Prosecution case, in short, is that, on 14.4.2011 at about 5.30 am, the appellant hit deceased Joseph with a cement block on his head and face and beat him with an iron pipe causing his death. Further case is that the appellant and deceased along with others were sleeping in a room attached to Hotel Abhirami as they were workers in the hotel at the relevant time. Without any provocation the appellant attacked the deceased causing his death, is the prosecution case.

7. To substantiate the prosecution case 19 witnesses were examined and 16 documents were marked. Exts. D1 to D3 are the defence Exhibits. Material Objects are M.Os. 1 to 12.

8. PW1 lodged Ext. P1 FIS. In his statement he has clearly implicated the appellant in the crime. PW19 Circle Inspector of Police, Ernakulam North Police Station conducted the investigation. At about 8 am. on 14.4.2011 he started investigation. He conducted inquest on the body of deceased Joseph between 9 am and 12 noon on the said day. Ext. P2 is the inquest report. It has come out in evidence through PW19 that even in the inquest report, identity of the appellant as the assailant was revealed. The appellant was arrested from the place of occurrence itself at about 1 pm. Ext. P9 is the arrest memo. His body was searched and an inspection memo (Ext. P10) was prepared. He had no apparent injuries. Ext. P5 is the mahazar through which his dress materials were recovered. MO2 is the pants worn by the appellant at the time of incident. Ext. P3 is the scene mahazar prepared by PW19. He proved recovery of MO1 iron pipe, MO9 bed sheet, MO10 cement block allegedly used by the appellant to hit on the deceased's head and three identity cards belonging to the appellant. PW19 sent the materials for scientific examination. Blood sample