BENJAMIN, SON OF ANTHONEY & OTHERS Vs. STATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILAKKOTTAI POLICE STATION, MANNAR THIRMALAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three appellants are the accused in Sessions Case No. 91/1995 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul. According to the first charge, the first and the second accused were charged for the offence punishable under Sec. 302, I.P.C. and as per the second charge, the third accused has been charged for an offence punishable under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34, I.P.C. The learned Trial Judge, on conclusion of the trial, convicted all the three accused under Sec. 302, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. Aggrieved over the said conviction and sentence, the accused have preferred the present Appeal. Mr. S. Shanmugavelayutham, learned counsel, appeared and argued on behalf of the appellants and Mr. K. Chellapandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appeared on behalf of the prosecution.

(2.) (a) P.W. 1 is the son of the deceased Mariamichael. A-1 and A-3 are brothers and A-2 is the father-in-law of A-1. Both the P.W. 1 and the accused are inter-related. According to prosecution, both the accused and the deceased party have got lands in their village. There was continuous dispute between the accused and the deceased group. P.W. 1 was looking after their lands along with his father, that is the deceased. A-1 and A-3, along with A-2, were looking after their lands. There was a common well and it is alleged by the prosecution that there was some dispute with regard to deepening of the well.

(3.) During the course of the trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws. 1 to 10 and marked Exs.P. 1 to P. 14 as well as M.Os. 1 to 8. On conclusion of the trial, the accused were put on notice under Sec. 313, Crimial P.C. regarding the incriminating materials available against them and the accused denied them as false and further stated that false has been foisted against them. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was produced by them before the Court. The Trial Judge, on consideration of the materials on record, found the accused guilty, convicted and sentenced them as stated above. Hence the present Appeal.