The burden of proof lies on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt all the ingredients of the offence with which the accused stand charged. The accused may discharge his burden by establishing a mare balance of probabilities in his favour with regard to the said circumstances.

1. - The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated March 31, 1993 passed by Judge, Special Court, Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota in Sessions Case No. 72/1992 whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC and 30 of the Arms Act. Under Section 302 IPC he was sentenced to suffer imprisonment of life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he has to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. While under Section 30 of the Arms Act, he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine, to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment.

2. The unfortunate part of the case is that the appellant is the father of the deceased Gurudeep Singh. The prosecution case in nutshell is that on basis of 'Parcha Bayan' Ex.P/1, crime No. 22/1992 was registered under Section 302 IPC at the Police Station Budhadit, district Kota. The charge against the appellant was that he made a gun fire causing pellet injuries to his son Gurdeep Singh, who succumbed to the injuries sustained by him. From the evidence led by the prosecution at the trial it appears that the appellant had three sons namely Gurdeep Singh, (now deceased), Hardeep Singh and Nirmal Singh. The appellant was having agricultural land of different khasra numbers, in revenue village Morpa, out of which most of the land was distributed amongst his three sons. The deceased Gurdeep Singh was residing separate while his two sons namely Hardeep Singh and Nirmal Singh were living together in a house. The appellant was also living separate from his sons. The appellant had 15 bighas of land in his possession for which he had executed a will in favour of his three sons. On the day of incident, the deceased Gurdeep Singh was sowing sugarcane plants on the land which was of the appellant. This was objected by the appellant. On this point there was some oral altercation between the father and son. The prosecution story further goes that the appellant, thereafter, brought a 12 bore gun from the house and asked his son Gurdeep Singh to kill him by making a gun fire if he wanted to be the owner of the land. Then, it is alleged that the appellant made a gun fire causing pellet injuries on the abdomen of Gurdeep Singh which resulted in his death. Post mortem of his dead body was conducted by PW. 7 Dr. Manu Mathur, who found the following injuries on the dead body :

Multiple gone shot wounds with blackening and tatooing and scorching of hairs, wound of seize peanut scattered over left side of abdomen and lower one third of left side of chest covering an area of size 12" x 8" with bleeding from a number of wounds.

3. PW. 16 Ramswaroop made investigation of the case. He prepared site-plan Ex.P/2 of the scene of occurrence. An empty cartridge was recovered from there vide seizure memo Ex.P/5. He also collected blood stained earth and control soil from the place of incident vide memos Ex. P/6 and P7/7 respectively. The weapon of the offence i.e. a 12-bore gun was produced by Nirmal Singh and it was seized vide memo Ex.P/8. The licence of the gun was also seized vide Ex.P/22. After usual investigation, a charge sheet came to be filed against the appellant in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Kota. The learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Judge, from where it was made over to the court of the Special Judge.

4. At the trial, prosecution examined 16 witnesses. Out of them PW. 1 Smt. Salvinder Kaur and PW. 5 Nand Kishore are eye-witnesses of the occurrence. P.W. 6 Nirmal Singh is brother of the deceased, who reached at the scene of occurrence immediately after the incident.

5. The defence of the accused was that he did not intend to murder his own son Gurdeep Singh and there was a scuffle amongst them which resulted in an accidental fire causing injuries to the deceased. In defence, Dr. Y.K. Sharma was examined a w