(1.) The three appellants were put up for trial before the Sessions court, Madurat for committing the murder of vellaikutty. To be more precise, the second appellant Mandaipuli was charged for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the indian Penal Code whereas the other two appellants Velleli @ Raman and Sogai Puli @ muthu were charged under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge, Madurai on appreciation of the oral evidence and other materials on record vide his judgment and order dated July 29, 1977, acquitted all the appellants. The State of Tamil Nadu being aggrieved by the order of acquittal preferred an appeal under Section 378 of the Code of criminal Procedure to the High Court at madras and the learned High Court vide its judgment and order dated February 5, 1979, reversed the order of acquittal and convicted a-2 under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and the appellant nos. 1 and 3 under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life.
(2.) The case of the prosecution as disclosed at the trial may be briefly summarised as under :-
(3.) It is alleged by the prosecution that the accused's paternal uncle Muthu Servai had three sons, Chidambaram, Andi and iruvankutti. About ten years prior to 1977, a dispute arose about the village common funds between Muthu Servai's sons Chidambaram and Andi on the one hand and Koothampatti periathankar Kulu Servai on the other. Because of this dispute, Chidambaram and Andi left their cattle first contrary to the usual practice whereby Kulu Servai used to take his cattle first on the Pongal day. This episode caused a trouble in the village and resulted in the murder of Chidambaram and Andi. Muthu servai gave a complaint about the said murder against Anandan, Chinnakalai. Palani and kulu Servai and that case ended in acquittal of all the accused. The deceased and Palani (Public Witness 2) continued to be friendly with Kulu servai even after that case. Consequently, muthu Servai was not well disposed of towards the deceased and Palani (Public Witness 2). Sometime in 1973, one Iruvenkutti was murdered at Koothampatti. Muttu Servai and the appellants herein complained about, the murder against the deceased, Public Witness 2's father in law Ponnayyan and Ponnayyan's son pitchai. All these three persons were tries but acquitted by the Sessions Court at Madurai. It is alleged by the prosecution that on this issue, there was an enmity between the deceased family on the one hand and the accused on the other. It is further alleged by the prosecution that about three months prior to the occurrence in the present case (17-12- 1976). A-2 lodged a complaint in the Sambatti police Station alleging that the deceased had assaulted him. The police found the deceased guilty in that petty case No. 283/76 and accordingly he was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25. 00. The deceased paid the fine. One day, the accused while passing through, the lands of the deceased for reaching their lands threatened to murder the deceased in retaliation of the earlier murder. Thereupon, Public Witness 1 and Public Witness 2 herein and the deceased lodged complaints against the accused to Subbiah gounder (Public Witness 9) , the village munsiff of Kottoor who told them that since the accused were residents of different villages, no action could be taken. However, he assured them that he would advise them to behave properly. Since then, deceased was scared of the accused and often used to take with him either Velu (Public Witness 1) or Palani (Public Witness 2) whenever he used to go.