JUDGMENT :

C.S.Sudha, J.

This jail appeal under Section 383 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused in S.C.No.375/2016 on the file of the Court of Session, Mavelikkara, challenging the conviction entered and sentence passed against him for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.

2. The prosecution case as stated in the charge sheet is as follows - The accused was in inimical terms with Bhasurangi, his mother, due to the disputes relating to the partition of their family property and as she had filed a case against the accused and obtained an order evicting him from her house. Due to this enmity, the accused with the intention of murdering her, on 23/10/2015 at 6 a.m., hacked her twice with an axe on the back of her head and below the neck, because of which her neck was severed from her body, resulting in her death. The incident took place near the well situated in the compound of her house bearing No.282 situated in Ward No.VI, Alam Panchayat. Hence the accused is alleged to have committed the offence punishable under the above-mentioned Section.

3. Based on Ext.P1 FIS of PW1, Crime No. 2626/2015, Chengannur Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC was registered, i.e., Ext.P18 FIR, by PW14, Junior Sub Inspector of the aforesaid Station. PWs.13 and 14 are the investigating officers in this case. PW14 verified the investigation conducted by PW13 and submitted the charge sheet before the court.

4. On the final report being submitted, the jurisdictional Magistrate, after complying with the statutory formalities, committed the case against the accused to the Sessions Court concerned, which court took the case on file as S.C.No.375/2016. On the appearance of the accused before the Court of Session, he was furnished with copies of all the prosecution records. On 08/06/2017, the trial court framed a charge for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, which was read over and explained to the accused to which he pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined PWs.1 to 14 and got marked Exts.P1 to P18 and MO1 to MO4. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Section 313(1)(b) Cr.P.C. regarding the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence of the prosecution. The accused denied all those circumstances and maintained his innocence.

5. As the Sessions Court did not find it a fit case to acquit the accused under Section 232 Cr.P.C., he was asked to enter on his defence and adduce evidence in support thereof. DW1 to DW3 were examined and Exts.D3 and D4 were marked on behalf of the accused. Exts.D1 and D2 are the contradictions brought out in the testimony of PWs.1 and 2.

6. On a consideration of the oral and documentary evidence and after hearing both sides, the trial court by the impugned judgment found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and hence sentenced him to imprisonment for life and to a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. It was held that in the event of an order under Section 433A Cr.P.C. by the competent authority, the accused would be entitled to set off for the period from 23/10/2015 to 18/05/2018, the period during which he was under detention pending investigation, inquiry, and trial in the case.

7. In the appeal memorandum, it is alleged that the impugned judgment is bas