XlI-189<JaiI) C J.P.R-f9-94 f^a. ^/;"; ..r' G-?li ^ ^. ^lV3^ CF0000059979 No ^.^o^ Fathefs name<, APPEA^OTPRISONER ^^^ .s&i^N...,^^, ^y°nw>' -xi-^;- ^ ~'' ' < M<^^l<<^r xb"'~ o ^3 ._C\ _ s^_, . ,_ _ . . . .. t ...,- J;^ M^^ l^ri-111 ^ .^hn:^^)- qKl--^-b<?1l6i,T Residence^_^ „ „ .._ ^. Ag6 .^,— f^ ^|<(-<3t0^ 'SlT^'iq.'^ ,1^ ^4' to .^_\'_^__ ' • ^ on »si . n »~, • n ~ '"' ^^TF'SH^P^V^KT,^ ...^^ ^.L3r- i ^.^ S Under Section O __A _ A ._ yj^^^T j^- ^p^^j <, | £^ fSTS •-S!^-) ICC<4? It is explained to the prisoner that if he states he wlslies ft' be represented by a legal practitioner theappellate Court will not proceed with the case for seven days unless the? , legal pracfitioner appears earlier. If the legal practitioner does not appear within seven days lie may not heard at all if the Prisoner states that he does not wish to be repre- sented by legal practitioner the court may proceed at once with the case and will not be obliged to give a hearing to my legal practitioner who should appear. 1 Date of Application for copy ofJudgement _ ___„ Date on which eopy received __ Date on wliich Appeal sent___5_^- ^)4>' \ c) €\% Whether the prisoner wishes to be represented or not. o _^_CL No Confl^^!^ <1^3 .2^_Name^^___ ^ .% », .^ 5^^T^^aiti< ^- ^I^K^ •I -^n^ts No. ~^s<~ Dated ^X~0£-^ ^ 199 ^l -' ^G^rf K -^' ^^' ^TY-t^ 2i~'^,e"i1 •n:M!M1'AA-3t^N3 to gether with a copy bfjudgement of order passed in the case forfavour of transmi- Cy'? ) ' ssion to the proper Appellate court. ^S~W"V-,S£S3s^. '•^ .. •::» •."'i -J.? ^~^ '^^ ;! IH"? •; '" i:' -':" :'^.:''i" TIr^ "' 'ii^? Dateof receipt in Office Date ofreceipt of record to accompany the MemoofAppeal to the Appellate court (JUSs^. (^. % Jail No Dated Forwarded to the 199 i > HI&H COURT OF CHHATTISeARH. BILASPUR C"!ir,ir,a! Aocsa.l No.1281 of 1998 Sajkumar - Vsrsus - State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhattisgarh) JU&SMENT FOR CONSIDER-ATION Sd/- C.BHADOO Judge HON'BLE MR- JUSTICE &HIREN&RA MISHRA POST FOR JU&©MENTON 2? .4PRIL^OQ6 Sd/- ^Tv o & t 26.4.2006 El :1.: F" COURT URT OF Ci-IHATTSSeARH, BILASPUR Criminai Appaoi No. 1281 of 1998 Rajkumar - Versus- S*a*s of AtodhyG Pradesh (now ChhaTrisga-h) i>u»^<«-»»*•** rrs.ss-fji * Mr. Sachin Smgh Kajput, Advoca+e: For the oppeiiant. Mr. U.M.S. &so, Add!. Pubiic Prosecutor with Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, Panei Lcncyer^ For the State/respor^ent. [ &IVISIGN BENCH: - HON'BLE MR. L.C. BHA&OO .4N& HON'BLE MR.bHIRENbRA MISHRA. JJ. JU &SM E NT (beiivsred on ^7nl April, 2006) Pnlinyyinq |udqrTI£Htnf ths CcsUrt WOS dsliysrsci bv t.,€. Bhcss^oo, J\~ 1. Appeliant Raijkumar has preferred this appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure through the Jcsiior, t'entra! Jeii. Bilcspur questioning the iegcii-ty 6 correclTsess of judgment of eonviction and ordsr of sentence datsd 12 May, 1998 passed by learned T Additional 5essions Judae, Biiaspur in Sessions Tria! No.214/97 whereby learneo Additiona! Sessions Judge after hoiding the accused/appeiiant gui!+y under Section 302 of The I.P-C- for commi'TTing murde" of his fcther Aadhaar, senTencsd him TO undergo imDrisonmeRt for !ife. 2. Brief facts ieading to fiiin9 of this appeai srs that on 13-2.1997 whsn deceased Aadhaar, father of Ciccused/appeiiant herein, wes sleepina in -riie house on a cot by covering his body with a Chadar, the accused/appelianT nli OT a sudden pici<ed up The iaTh!, wn'ch was 'ymi ;-'^ -3- necr the cot, attacked •ftie deceased with the same on hi3 head, as e result of whieh deeeased sustained severe injuries, even the skuii was fractured. On Coming to know about the incident, Jaikumar, younge" brol^er of accused, took his fcther to the Pollcs 5ta+icr! Chakar'bhcta, informed the poiice and thsreafter, took his fathe" tc Dharam i-iosoita!. BilasDur for treatment, where Aadhaar succumbed to the injuries on 15.2.1997. As such, a merg intimation (Ex.P-6) was sent by the hospitai to wie Foiics Station t.it',' Kotwaii, Bilaspur, bcssd cn *hat, *hs offencs unde" Ssction 302 of IPC a* S". No. C wcs rsaistered under" E.x.P-4 caid thereaftsr-, soms was forwsi-eieel to The Poiice Station Chakarbhcita under- whose jurisdiction the offence a'as committed in Vislage Bundela. The 5tation House Officer, Poiice Station Chakorbhata registersd -ttis i^qular- Crim®No.i9/97 undsr F.I.R. (Ex.P-4). After registering the crime, the ZnvesTiuaTino Officet" took up the inyestigution, after giving notice (Ex.P-2) to the Panchas prepared the inquest (Ex.P-3) of the body of deceasad "adhcscr. He took into possession the b!ood stained soii cnd plci" soii from the olace of occur-rence. l-1e siso took into o<tssesswr, ths wecpon of offence, lathi and one towei under Ex.P-9. Slte pian (Ex.P- 10) of th®place of oeeurrenee wois prepared. Lathi in question was ssnt for dQctor's oDinion uncsffr' ExH-14 as to ^hsther the i*i.|uris.c found on the head of decsassd could be caused by ir. The docTor qeve his oDinion vide Ex.P-19 that it was psssibie to infiict the injuries found on the head of Aadhaar by the lathi in question. Postmortem on ths body of dsceassd was conductsd in &h"ra'r! 1-tospitai, Biiaspur" by &.". 'V.K. Verma, who prepared the postmortaTi rspor* Ex.P-lS in whlch hs cpined Thct the dssrh is dus to intsrnai haemorrhage iind coma as a resuit of fracture of skuil. Recovered articles were se.nt for chemicai exo.mination to Forensic 5aer.ee. LsboraTory, Scgar from where repor* Ex.P-2Q was received. After wmpktion of inyestigation eharge sheet wns fikd againgt the- accused/'oippeiisint in the Court of Judicia! Magifitrate Fifst Ciass: ^? 2-'. y •^** iilasuur, who in turn committed the case to tecrned Sessiens Judue Bilaspur where learned Sessions Judge initialiy eommeneed th®trb.l and recorded tiie evidence- i-iowever. iater on, the case wss trcnsferr'ed To lesrned T^ Additional Sessions Judqe, Btiaspur whc recorded the rsmainino evidence and also ths s'i'atewsnt cf accused/qspeiiant under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in whieh aceused either dsnied 1+ie evidencs or stuted that he is not uware of the fact. Tne accused has aiso statea that on account of his iii man+al heaith he cotnmitl-ed ths crime. 4. Learned Additiona! 5e5sions Judge efter hecring -the ar9ur"ents of learned counsei tor rsspectiv®parties, convicted and santsnesd ths accused/oDDeliant in the manner as n-ierttioried in Para-1 of this i. We hnve heard AAi". Sachin Sinah ftaJDut, iearned counse! fcr the; appeiiant and Mr.U.N.S. E>eo. Ad'dl. Pubiic Pr'oseeutor with flAr. rt.P.S. Bha+ia, Pane! Lawyer on behalf of ths S+a+s/respondent. 6. Homicidal death of deceoised Aadhoiar 'is not in disou+e. 7. The conviction hns been chaiienged orifflar'liv on the ground 1-hcst bv reason of unsoundness of mind, at The time of eommission of crime, the dieeused/appsllant was ineapable of Rnowing the natur®of aet aiid he was not k)'iow!H^ what is eithfir' wron^ or contrary to the iaw. Thersfcre, as pe" pr-oviSions of SecTion 34 of The IPC Ths accused/aDCeiiant eould not have bsen convicted. S. Lsarned counsel tor the aeeused/appsiksnt whiie "sterr'ing tiis evidence on re-sord crcusd inct aT The time of commlssion o1: criffie the accused/appelbnt was suffering ft'ow unsoundness of mrid ond 'ne was not knowing the nature of act or that he was doing what wcss sithsr wron^ or cop.trciry to lcw. Zn suppcrt of his contsntion, Isam'sd counssl drawn th®attention of this Court towards ths ser'tlficats Ex.C-1 issued by the Civil Surgeon, 5ardcr PuTe! Hospita!, Bitaspur in <• L ressonse to the order of iearned 5essions Judse. BitasDur. which shows tiiat the aeeused/oppelidint was suffering from unsoundness of mind. He further subraitted that even during the. pendency of this appea! on the directions of the High Court of M.P., Jsbalpur The accused/appetiamt wcs referred to Jabaipur for aseertainina his mental eondition and vide ietter dated 29.9.1999 the iViedical Officer, Csntral Jail Hospital, Jabaipur informsd +he Court that the accusea/appeiiant wcs ssnt for treatment to Wts .wental Hospitsi, Jcbcipur, he was ksp* unde" observation ond on 16.9.99 &r. P.K. Joseph of Mentsl Hoscitsi, JcbaJDur after examinina the aecused/appellant, deciared him o patient of "Paronoid SchizophreniG". ^fter refsrring thsss two medical certiflcatss he aiso ar9ued thct it is svicient from th®prosscution evidence that the accused/sppeiiant was suffering frotfi mentci iliness inscniTy Since iast 12 years and even before the date of commission of crime, accused/appeiiont disappeared from the house for a period of 6 yecrs end retumed to the house oniy 2-3 months prior to the a'a+e of incident. He further submittsd that it has come in tha evidsnca that even many times the aecused used tci roam m the village In naked eondition and he flilso used to o.ssault 1+ie yiilagers, Therefore, convicTion or Tne appelianT !S oad m iauf and erroneous. 9. On the other hand, learned Additional Pubtic Pr'osecutoi' with iesrned Panei Lawyer for the State supported •t+ie judgment of Tr'iai Cou'<t. 10. Having heard learned eounse! for the pesrties, we have peruisad the record. 11. In order to seek protection under Section 84 of rhe Indian Psnai Code. the onus i-s on tiie nccused to e-stablish 1+io.t a+ the time of commission of offsnce he »vas sufferino from unsoundness of mind. Section 84 contemciates 1tsat; "Nothing i3 an offence whieh is done by a person who at fhe time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incaDabie of knowinq the nature of the -act, or that he is domg wnaT is eiThec wong or conTra"' TO 'aw ^ 'hsretors, when a piea ot i®9aiinscnity is set-up, the Gourt hcas to ascertain whether at the tirne of commiSsion of offence the aecused under the supervening circurnstancea on aceount of unsoundness of mind, was incapable of knowing the nsture of act or that he was doing what was eithe" wrong or csntrary To The ia'A'. The cr-ucJGi goint of time for ascertaininq the state of mind of ttie aceused is the time when 1tie offence was eommitTed and in order to cscei'tcin whether the ciceused was auffering from unssundnesa of mind as to be entitied to the benefit of Section 84 of IPC ccsn on!y B!£ sstabiished from 1+ie circumsTances, which preceded, ctrended and foibwed the crime. In this ccnnection, cs ser the provisions of Seetion 105 of ths Evidence Aet there is burden on the accused "o discnargs fhe same in order to claim bsnsfit of Section 84 of f"e Z.P.C. Section 105 enyisaqes that; "When <a Deraon is aecused of any offence, the burders of pro'/ing the sxistencs of circumstancas bringing the case withm ony of 1+ie ©enera! ExcepTions in the Zndia" Penai Code, IScQ or within esny special exeeption or proviSo eontained in any oTM$r pcir-r of 'ms sam^ cocis, or ir* ctny iciw oeT'Minf the offence, is upon him, and tiie Court shall pr-ssume +ne absence of such circun'stances. The provisions of Section 84 of IPC recd witii Section 105 cf Evidence Act came up for eonsideration befors the i-son bie Apex Court In the n'lati-er of Dahyabhai V. Stote of ©ujaratreported in 1964 (7) SCR 361 and the Hon'bie Apex Court heid that; "...Even if the accussd was not cbie ts establish conclusiveiy that he was insane at tiie time he commiTted the offence, The evidence olacsd before the Court may raise a reasonable doubt in the mind of *he court as csisar'ds ons c" ino"® of th® ingredfents of the offence, inciuding mens rea of the accused and in 1+iat cesss the sour* wouid be enTlTiec to ttequit the accused on the around that the generai burden of proof resting 0,1 the prosecution was not dischafQed. The burden of proof on the accused to ' ^s.' (1) (2; prove the insunify is no higher than that rests upon u pcrty to ciyi! proceedings, which, in other words, means preponderance of Drobabilities..." The Court further hsld that doctrine of bur'den of sroof in ths context of plea of insanity may be stated in the followina words: ths &rnsscut'on must nroye bevorid rsssoHQbis doubt that the accused had ccmmitted the cttenc® with the requisite mens rea: and the burden of proving thsr aiwoys rests on the pr'osecuTion from the beginning to the end of the triai. there is a rebuttabis presumotion that th®aeeusea waS not insane, when he cofflmitted the crime, in if'.e senss taid dowr! by 5.84 cf rhe Pena! Code: the aceused mm rebut it by pbeing before ti-ie eourt <si! th® rs!evGiftt svidsnce- or%l, docufnentG.^ cr circumstantia!, but the 'ourden of pr'oof upon him 's no highe" Than ThaT rests ucon a DC"TV to civii procesdings: tve" !T tne accusec! was not a&le To ssTabl'sh eonciusively that he was insane at the time he commitTed the offencs, the eyidence ptaced before the Court mav nuse a reasonabie doubt in -rtie mind oT tfis courT as "eqafiis one or n'o.-s ot T)ie inaredienl's of the offence, inciuding mens rea of The cccussd ^nd iin 't'hcT csxss Ths cour't' woyici bs. entitied •{•o scqijit the accused on the 9round that wse gsnerai ouroen of prooT resTmg o" tfe prosecution was not discharged." (2) le.. inier-stor-s. ihs &roS£CUt)Ori. in G. Cu3£ OT nOiTiiCiuS SnGSi OE'c'y^. beyond reasonabie doubt that th®aecused eaused death with fns requisits intsntion dsscribea )n Ssction 299 cf 'ms Zndiayi Psmi£i Code. TTiis generoi burden never shifts a",d it siwssys "SSTS on ths orosecution. But, under Sectiors 105 ef Evidencs Act the burderi of proving fne existence of circumstances br'inging the ease wi'i'hin the ^aifj s^csption lie5 on ths accussd, "nd ths CQurt shall presums the absence or such csr'cuwstances. ine aceusea nas rc rstsuT 'f.e prssufripTlon itsa* such circumsta-ices did not sxist, by piacing iTiaterial befor-e the court sufficient +o make it eonsider the existenee of such circumstanees so probabte that a prudent man IPJO^IQ Q^T upon then1. Ths Qccussd has to satisfy ITI£ stG"dGrd of (2 z..- -• •y 'pFLidSHt (TiuH'* Xf tnS ITtuitSDSi pl&C£d b£i0r^tnS CGUFt, SUCh uS, OF^Ea ond doeumentctry evidenee, presump+ions, admissions or eyen the prosecuTion eviaence, ssTisTies •me TSST OT prudenT man fne cccusss •A"!I hcye discharqed his burde". 13. As psr Istt^r of ^sdicai Offic^r/ CsntrQ* ija" Hosp'tsi, J^abaipur da+sd 29.9.1999 the accused was sxamined by the doc+or' of Atsn+ai Hospita!, Jabaipu" csnd afTer excmir,aticn The docTor dicgnosed hm QS ihe patient of 'Parcncid Sehizophrenia'. In a recent Jud9rrient af the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Shrikant Anandrao 8hons!e V. Stste of Maharash-tra repCT+ed i" .42R 2002 5C 3399, the 1-ion bie Apsx Court piacinq r'eiiance on the Modis Madicai (JurJSurudsncs ufid Toxicoioyy f22 Edttion} ob^rv'£dthut^ "What 'is pamnoid sehisophrenia, when It s+er+s w.'no.t are !TS cliaracter'isTics an<3 aonqers t'owing from thls oilment. Paranoid Schizophr'enia. in the vsst !T'.C!or'ity of sasss, starts in Ifas fourth decacie dt-id developa inaidiouisl'y. Suspiciousness is the characterlstis symptom ot the sas'iy stsge. Idsas ot refer-ence oceur, which graduuiiy deveiops into dsiusioMS o'f DersscuTion. AuciiTory hdlucsnG't'ions fo!low, which in the beqmriinq, start o.s sounds 01- "oises in the ears, but are atter'wards changss into abuses or ins'uits. De!usions are ist fir'sT indefiriite, but 9rGduGl'y thsy beccms f'xed ond definite^ IQ tsad the patient to bsiieve thst hs is persecuted by some unknown per-son or some superhuman agency- He beiieves thut his fooQ i3 beiny poisoned. some no3<jous 9GS£Sor^ bioyyn into his roQm, oind psop'e £2F£ Olottino oaainst him to ruin him. Disturbances ot genera! sensation gives rise to hallucinations, which 4^y»^^ rf^^^^ifc^l f^^f^ ^^ ^in^ '^^V^^-^^^ ^^ ' ^^/*^n^rt^'/? uire i-ti ii'iuU ft£u >V artC. &jjSuJ.= Vi riypn^ ii;sHi, sisctricity wirsisss tsis^rQphy or "toniic assnc'ss. The satjen* aets ve"y irritcted and excirsd owing to thegc_,jMiinfu! and disaareeabie hatlucinations and delusioRS. 5ince sc ?r,a!';y peopis are against him and o.re in+erested in h's ruin. he- ss?mes to be'ieve that he must be a ver^' smoortcnt man. The naturs o" delusiong thui may change from p«'o<ecutory to the grandiose rype. Hs eRTsr-Tains delusicns of g"a"deur, power and wsol+h, and g^neraity eotiduets hirnsslf 1" a haughty and ovsroaarmg manne". s he patient ususiiy -8' retuins hls iTioney and orientation and does not ahow siqns of inscn'ty, until the conversQtiorts 's dirsctsd to ths &articuiar type of delusions from which hs is suffer'mg. When deiusions affect his behaviour, he is often a source cf diSnaer To himse!f and to o-thsFS' (fcmphasis suppiisd) l4.In s rscent paper pubiished on Schizophrsnia' writts" by AAeiissa f.. Spearjng, ,"i.i-!.S. cf *he Office of Communications and Public Liaison NIMI-1 'oassd on the studv, i-esearsh and resources of Nationsi Aniance for the Atentality TH. (NAflAI), Nationa! Anentai HeaS-rti ^Hg^oclcTion fNi^AH^^ <s MGTsond Tns'tiTuTs OT ^snTcEJ HscilTh Association (NlMI-i). It has been stated in the said paps" thot SCrliZvphrSFiiu i3 u ChrOFIiC. 3SV&FS uFid diSubitily br'ulri diSSuSS. Th6 s^y^rity of ^yrnDtotift^ o-nd "ang-l^stin^ ehronie DiSttsrn of Schizophrenia often cause a high decree of idissbiilty- The fi!*st Signs of 5chizophre"la ofts" s^pear as cosifusing, or e'/er! shocking, chcinoes jn bshcvicur. Howeyer, ths individual with "chronic" schtzophrenia, or a continuous or reeucring pattern of iiiness. often does not fuily r'ecover normul furictionina ana' typica!!y requ'rss long tsrw trectmsnt, 9sneraiiy including medication, to eontr'oi the sympToms. Coping with *he sympToms of schlsophrsnia csn be espseidiiiv difficult for- faniiiv inembers who remernber how involved w vjweious a person wo.s befor'e they beeame ili. Tne suddei'i onset QT 5gyg^^ ncy^jnQ-^-i^ SVrRD'fOtTSS 'S r>£'f£?*r'£S2~rn GS ^1 lIGCU~t'£ GhGS£ OT schizophrsnia. Psychosis , es common condition in sshizsphr-snia, iS Q /T+^+.^ ^^ u^^^^^^i iartrti^^^ik^uvtEi^tft^ uwi^^a^iy^A.^ i^.k < ^ft-^lii i^iiaft^^+irf^.fl^ j^ Ki^q^tlfl rf^ui.^-i ,3luj% i^j ineriiui iHii/UnTnf&fti iiiUi'nt.'U t/y fjuiiU^.iriU i ivriS; wFili-n urs. disturbances of sensory pei'ception, and/or delusions, which ara faise yet strongiy heid personaJ beiiefs that resuit from an innbility to cgnQiviT-ff r'g^i Tro?n unrsoi! exDsrisn^^s. Lsss obvious svsTtDTofr^s. sych as socicl isotation or withdrawal, or ursusuai soeech, think'no; o" behciviour, muv precede, be seen aiong with, oc foiiow 1'he ps'/chotic sytnptoms, /'•^a 15. DsiuSiOiis uFg folss DsrsoFicii b£u£t3thut uF^ i'lOt SLib i£CttO r-£u30Hor eontndiGtory eyidenee and ar®not explained by a person'^ usua! cuiTural concepts. uelusions may TaKe on ai.frerem' Tnemes- !~c>r exaT.pis, paTients suffsring frorr, psircrsoid-type sy?",pToiTss "oughiy one-third of DSODJS with schizoDhrenia often ho.ve flelusior.s cf persecution, or faise and ir-rational beliefs that they are being che-ated, harassed, poisoned, or conspired against. These patients wcy beiieve that they, or a mennber ot the tcmiiy o" someone ciose to rhem, ars ths focus of -rhis Bsrsscurlon. Schisophrenla oftsn affects a pei-scn's abiSity to "think straioht". Thoughts mcy eome and go ropidly; t'ne person may not be abie ta eoneentrote on one ThouQh 'for ysry io"Q CTtd fnGy bs scisily d'strQc't'sd, uncibis 'tc 'fGCus attantion. Ksopte with paranoid and psychptic symptorns, which_san becon'iS 'inforss if medicotioiis ars discontinued, mov siso be o* hlGhs" riak for vioient behav'iour- When violence does occur, it is wast freauenny taraeted at familv members and friends. ond more ofte?) +/ii/^»ertin're> rt^ hf>nie» (fcmphasis supisiiec) 16. Now we shaii s"ocssd to seruTinizs the svidenca svciiiobie on rscord to ascsrtain <xs to whether th®accussd ori accounT of supei-venrig cii'eumstanees by reason of Varanoid Schizophrenia' at the t'me cf ccrnT?lisslo?1 Q'f o'f'fsncs WGS noT c5^3Gfc'£ QT 'jpdsr's't'sEndlHQ th's f12Turs of ths act, or that he is doing what is srther wron9 or contr'ary 1-& iaw and <nr *i—-!- i UT' inui suroose wheltier th£ accussd has bssn able "o 105 of dischar'ge the burden of proof as per pr-ovisions of Sec+ion 105 the E'/idence Act, as per Ine principies enunciated by the i-ion bie Aoex Coui'1*'1'!" 'ttls "RGTtsr o'f DGuhvGbhoi's CGSS, 17.As has been mentionea In th®eoriicr sar't of thls iudqmei'it that durina the trliil on the ui'ders of lec.rned Sessions Judge, BiiSSDu" the aeeus®d/app®HAn+was c.xaminsd by ths Ciyi! -Surgson, .S<i.rdar Pstei Mospitai, Biisspur* ana after exflminstlon doctor' 'ieaued the iK+^-Pi/*yt+<» C^v f*'-'a *n *<tini'*h '^'»^'*'"x /1»f<r*rlt?A^< •Hft£> y'/*/*! i<;5?rt rs*? ft /*flc?i •<~ <i i i\f\AiiS' ^A+\<*—AiU vSiiIiuiti »d»/^r«»/i^iui'^i iwf&t^j ist<ui \A^i>»*i^.d<>-*<i vt^ »* \^\A*£I 'Deoressi'v'e Psychosis' and adv'isecf to vefsr hiiTi to Ments! HoSDitcl. •Swa!ior, In the said eertifieat®it wos further mentioned that th& accused was kept unaer observation for 10 days i.e. from 9.8-1997 tc !S.S.1°97 and fol'owing poirits sfers obserysd in fsvour of hls Hj weiTtal health; >. LooKs lurifittic. jl^ Forced fsedin<j^ clothlnQ ^s bGthip.^ Not mixed with others. ^iseoisssnsss. »1. IV. Aa has aiready been mantioned sboye that isuring pendency of this appesi under Ths ordsrs of rhe Then High Court Ths accased wcs aiso excmined in the Mental Hos&ita!, Jabaiour and he was difflanosed as' the potient of 'Paronoid Schizophrenia' in fne year-1999- IS.P'A'-l Juikumar iViunhar, brother of cecused & son of deceased, has 3't'ated in his evidence that on cominq to knoui about the nsaauit rnude by the accused on his fathe" he rushed towards the r-esidence, after "eaching the hcuse, hs saw ^kst h'ss faths," was sleeping on ths cot in unsorsscious stage, thsre was in.iury sn his head and biood was ooziriti Otit Gf (t. nt thut tirTtS. uCCUSSu wuS (H hi3 FOOrH Ofid ut thut tiniS ths eonditio" of ifie accused was just iike a mod "to-i. I" the sro.iii- axaminatiQn, which wesa racorded on 19.1.19SS, this w'stness hae sraTsd -rhaT his broThe" was mad ssr.cs iasT 12 years, due To madnsss he remained out of viiiaae for a seriod of & vears cnd a-bout 3 months prior to the date of incident he retumed to the vt'ilage, Accussd ussd to ro"Fn in yi"Gns in nnksd condition- Accu^-d ussd to assauit viiiagefs. He, evan informed ths poiice thrica about the msntai condition cf accused. They ussd to kses the accused in a t'oom and provide food to him there only. AAwy" a times, Eiecused used to o.ssa.u'it them mso and some time he used to remain -Siient. PVV-2 Christ Sci, d<xughtsr-iin-!cw of dececssd, hcis stoited in th^ cross- examinatjon that accused is eider brother of her husbane!, atts" uiurf'luuS Iv'nSri 3n£ Cum£ iH TriG riOUSS, uCCU3£Q WG3 FiOT irt Tn& rsOUS£, he w+yr'nsd 1-2 mon+hs srior to the date of incident, Aeeused 13 ^L mad, he behaves in unusua! manner, some tirrie he roum without clothes and som®time he assauit anyons, PW-3 Nesras 8ai. mother of accused & wife of deceased, has stated in examination-in-chief thct accused was just ilke s r".cci mai. In The cross-sxaminction she h-ss statsd that accused is mad sincs fast 12 vears. he ussd to thro-A' his clofhes and roam in naked condition, he was behaving different from a man nf ordinary prudence and he discippeared from the house for iast 6 yssrs and returnad to the house 2-3 months prior to we inciden*. He ••";as |us? iiks a r"iad ma",. Even -itis Sub-InspscTor 5h"i B.K. Sinah (PW-4) in the cross-sxamination hss statsd that he had not inwstigated r-egarding the beating by aceused in a stage of unsoundnsss of .Tiirid. uurinQ 'nysst'QQtion he co[iTt€ tc knoyu thct accused used to behcve iike cs mad man emd hs wsnt to Uttar Pradesh ^uxatWI XlLl/tUl^k ^ ."3 UI*<^U»+i^<«t t^tlllAM *A +tn.|llk rfll.A'+*^ •A^- t*l»rf«ij^/»*»lj* SH|.)K? »»rfh«*<<^t»n.l^^i +A j rt/fti Wn^i'S;- £.~'^ iTt^fiiriS yFil/f' iv ififs- UUIc. vi j?!ik-lu<£tii ri& ft&.iUi'iiBSU iv the viilaoe. Vi/hen he arrested the accused, his condftion Wfas iust iike a mad man. 19.Therefore, from the above evidence of family members of The aecused a"d evidence of Investigating Offieer (PW-4) coupled with the medical certiTicaTa fcx.i--! ana we meflicai sxaminaTiort conducTed by The docTc" of Ms'iTai HcsoiTai, Jablapur sn 'A'hjch he diaonosed 1+is accused as a satienT of Varanoid Schizophrenia' onci &'iSo the faet that the aecused/iappelldnt without gr'udge or anything eis£GQsinst his 'fG'thsr. whsn 'i^ic dscsGSsd ,^Q(JhQcr WGS slesDinci. th® accused, aii of a sudden, picted up the lat.hi, which was lying rsear the co* on which deeeassd was steeoincs and assaiiited his rerrher with tha+ la+hi on his head. Moceovef, after assauitinfl the deceaaed. •t+ie accuged ngain went inside hiS room and was sitting In the room just likc d rricd ?wc^* T1^€rwforw,c^cirt from th$ msdicail ds orQi syids^cs rsoar'dinei th®unsound mind ot accussd. this .sonduct ot accused assauitina his father* withouT sny rhyme or reoson cemnot be tsrmed to b®w aeti'on of 9 man of ordinar^ prudenee, As sueh, tiie conduct or the accused/appeiiant shows that at the time of commission of vs: CriFTi£ n£WG3 SuiTSFiHu iFOiTi linSOUHunSSS OT inif'iu. T?i£r~£TOf-S,DuSSQ