CHIRANGI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHIRANGI, Lohar, 45 years, a widower, his unmarried daughter, only son Ghudsai, 12 years, and nephew Khotla (P. W. 2) lived together at Idnar, Narayanpur tahsil, Bastar district. Their relations were cordial, and Ghudsai was attentive and considerate to his fattier who had an abscess in his leg for some time prior to he 3rd April 1951. During that afternoon, while Khotla was working in his field, Chirangi took an axe and went with Ghudsai to a nearby hillock, known as Budra Meta, in order to gather 'siadi' leaves. When Khotla returned to his house in the evening, Ghudsai was not there and he found Chirangi asleep with the blood-stained axe beside him. Chirangi woke up at midnight, and when Khotla questioned him concerning his son's whereabouts he replied: I had become insane. I have killed my son in Budra Meta. It occurred to me that a tiger had come to me. I then dealt blows with the axe.

(2.) ON the following morning, Chirangi repeated ' this version to the mukaddam Bandi (P. W. 3 ). Ghudsai's corpse was found on hillock, and Chirangi told the 'kotwar' Aitu (P. W. 1) that he had killed his son by mistake for a tiger, that two of his sons had died from insanity and that he himself was insane. The autopsy showed that Ghudsai had incised wounds on the right temple, neck and left humerus with a comminuted fracture of the right temporal bone. Chirangi had two superficial abrasions on the front of the shoulders and a superficial abrasion ?" ? ?" on the outer part of the left eyebrow which could have been caused by a fall or r contact with a hard, and rough object.

(3.) CHIRANGI in examination explained that he had sustained these injuries by falling on a stone and that because of madness he did not know what had happened at the hillock, m defence, he added he had 'bona fide' mistaken his son for a magic tiger and was incapable of knowing the nature of his act. There was nothing to show that he was insane before or after the occurrence; and it was clear that he was devoted to his son. Dr. Palsodkar, when asked whether there could have been in the circumstances a fit of temporary insanity stated: I assume that there was no symptom of epilepsy in this case. Without excitement, such temporary insanity should not ordinarily come.