The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the burden of proof on the accused to show that the case falls under the exception of Section 84 IPC.

( 1 ) THE accused/appellant who is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, for committing the matricide and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, has preferred this appeal.

( 2 ) THE brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows :the accused - Sannatamma, his brother Against order of Sessions Judge, Uttara kannada, Sessions Divisions Karwar, in S. C. No. 3 of 2001, D/- 7-7-2001. P. W. 1 Parameshwar and P. W. 4- Ravi Kiran were the children of the deceased - Laxmi. All were residents of Achave village of Borolli village in Ankola Taluk. According to the prosecution as there was incompatibility between the wife of the accused and the deceased-mother-in-law, accused was staying separate with his family members in the same village whereas the deceased P. Ws. 1, 4 and their other family members were staying in one house. According to the prosecution some landed properties were in the name of the deceased and the accused was pestering to transfer the lands in his name. The deceased was reluctant to do so and it is alleged that she had rebuked the accused stating that as long as she would be alive, her properties would not be transferred to anybody. This denial or refusal on the part of the mother alleged to be the caus'e and motive for the crime in the incident in question.

( 3 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution in the morning of 16-9-2000 while P. W. 1 and his neighbours - P. Ws. 2 and 3 were sitting in front of the house and on arrival of the accused when the deceased Laxmi was about to serve him with a tea, suddenly he picked up a sickle lying nearby and gave a fatal blow on the neck of the deceased resulting in her instantaneous death. P. Ws. 1, 2 and 3 immediately caught hold of the accused, tied him to a tree nearby and thereafter with the assistance of P. W. 5 another neighbour informed the Jurisdictional Police at Ankola police Station. P. W. 12 Shivanand - the Head constable and S. H. O. on duty on receipt of the Information immediately went to the spot, learnt about the incident from P. W. 1 and others and recorded the statement of P. W. 1 as per Ex. P. 1. Along with Ex. PI and the accused, he returned back to the Police station and then entrusted the matter to the a. S. I.- P. W. 11. P. W. 11 registered a case in Crime No. 167/00 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. , against accused and arranged to send the F. I. R. to the Jurisdictional Magistrate as well as Superior officer. Thereafter, the investigation was taken up by Dayanand - P. W. 13 - the police Inspector who drew necessary maha- zars, seizure of certain materials including m. Os. 2 to 4 from the spot, recorded the statements of witnesses and arranged for body being subjected to autopsy. After completion of the investigation on receipt of all the necessary report, charge-sheet came to be filed against the accused. On committal and after charges being framed, as the accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried, he was tried In Sessions Case No. 3/2001.

( 4 ) THE prosecution has relied upon the evidence of 13 witnesses as well as Exs. P. 1 to P. 12 and M. Os. 1 to 6 to bring home the charge against the accused. Though the accused while being questioned under Section 313 Cr. P. C. , answering the incriminating circumstances has denied the prosecution case but has filed a written statement which is as follows : (Vernacular matter omitted)ALONG with this written statement, he has also produced hospital card Issued by the karnataka Institute of Mental Health, dharwad, as well as a letter addressed to the relatives of the accused by the Medical officer of the Karnataka Institute of Mental health, Dharwad, dated 21-3-1997. On perusal of the written statement as well as the trend of cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses, It is apparent that the accused has taken a plea of Insanity. The trial Court on perusal of the entire evidence declining to accept the plea of Insanity, found the