JUDGMENT

KAILASAM, J.:— This appeal is by Special Leave accused 1 and 2 in S. C. 26 of 1974 on the file of Sessions Judge, South Ascot Division, against their conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal No. 823 of 1974 dated 1st September, 1975.

2. The two Appellants and Muthuthamizaharesan were accused Nos, 1-3 in the Session Court, The first appellant was found guilty under Sec. 302 read with Section 149, I. P. C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The second appellant and the third accused were found guilty of an offence under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. On appeal by the two appellants and the third accused, the third accused was acquitted by the High Court and the appellants Nos, 1 and 2 are before us.

3. The deceased Rasayal is the sister of appellants and the third accused. The first accused Dhanabal is the eldest and the second appellant and the third accused are his younger brothers. The second appellant married Laxmi, the daughter of Rasayal. Rasayal owned about 5 acres of land in Keelakkarai village. She executed a general power of attorney Exh. P-15 on 31st Aug. 1970 in favour of the second appellant Rasayal, after she lost her husband, started leading an immoral life which was disliked by her brothers. As a result, Rasayal began to cultivate her own land in spite of the power of attorney executed in favour of the second appellant. There was misunderstanding between the parties and Rasayal had complained to the Police stating that her brothers had threatend to do away with her.

4. On the date of the occurrence at about 1.30 p.m. on 5th December, 1973, when Rasayal and her farm servant Parmasivam, P. W. 4 were working in her field removing weeds, the two appellants and the third accused converged to the place where Rasayal was working. The first appellant was armed with Veecheruval, the second appellant was armed with a spade and the third was unarmed. On seeing them, Rasayal ran towards the channel running adjacent to her fields. The third accused instigated the first appellant to cut her saying that she was leading an immoral life and that she should not be left. Thereupon, the first appellant cut Rasayal on the right side of her neck with the Veecheruval and she fell down in the channel raising an alaram. The second appellant stated that she should not be left at that and that her head should severed from her body, she being an immoral woman. Thereupon, the first appellant caught hold of her hair by the left hand and cut her neck with the Veecheruval, severing the head from the trunk. The occurrence was witnessed by Ramalingam P. W. 1 and Ramakrishnan, P. W. 2 who were returning at that time after spraying insecticides in the field of P. W. 1. Challadarai. P. W. 3 who was coming to the field of Rasayal with food for P. W. 4 also saw the occurrence. Nagappan P. W. 5 who was going towards the scene of occurrence to meet Ramakrishnan P. W. 2 for getting arrears of wages also saw the occurrence. Soon after the occurrence, the first appellant left taking away the Veecharuval with him and second appellant leaving the spade near the feet of the deceased Rasayal.

5. P. W. 4 gave a report Ext, P-7 to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kameratchi at 3 p.m. on the same day. The Sub-Inspector recorded the narration of P.W. 4 read it over to him and obtained his signatures. After registering a case under Section 302, I. P. C. he took up the investigation and proceeded to the scene of occurrence and held the inquest. The Doctor who conducted the post-mortem was of the view that the deceased appeared to have died of severance of the head from the trunk. During investigation, the Police had Section 164, Cr. P. C. statements, recorded from P. Ws. 1 to 5 before the Sub-Magistrate, Childambaram on 24-12-1973. During the committal proceedings, P. W. 4 turned hostile but P. Ws 1, 2, 3 and 5 gave evidence supporting the prosecution. After