JUDGMENT :

The appellants were arraigned as accused Nos. 1 to 4 along with other accused Nos. 5 to 8 in S.C.No.238/2007 on the file of the Presiding Officer, Fast Track CourtIV, Mysuru, for the alleged offences under Sections 143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 341, 201, 427 and 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC. The trial court has acquitted accused Nos.5 to 8 holding that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt against them. However, the trial court found sufficient materials against accused Nos.1 to 4 and hence convicted them for the offences under Sections 143, 148, 341, 302 and 201 r/w Section 149 of IPC. They have been sentenced to undergo S.I. for one year for the offence under Sections 148 of IPC, one month for the offence under Section 341 of IPC and undergo R.I. for life for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and also undergo R.I. for three years for the offence under Section 201 of IPC. They have also been sentenced to pay fine with default sentence. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the appellants have challenged the said judgment and sentence on various grounds.

2. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for appellants as well as learned Addl. S.P.P. for the respondent State. We have carefully reevaluated the oral and documentary evidence on record and also examined the correctness of the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court.

3. Before adverting to the grounds urged and elaborated before this Court by learned counsels and accompanied by learned Addl. S.P.P., we feel it, just and necessary to put forth in brief the factual matrix of the prosecution case.

4. The case of the prosecution is that, one Mr MahadevuPW1 has initiated criminal proceedings by lodging a report as per Ex.P.1. The case of the prosecution as divulged in the said document is that the deceased Mani and PW1-N Mahadevu, residing at 1st Cross, in Khantaraja Urs road, Jayanagar, Mysuru. The deceased Mani was doing business in Shamiyana shop and also running an autorikshaw. It is alleged that, said Mani was responsible for the marriage of one Nagesh with the sisterinlaw of accused no.2 viz., Kumara. The said Kumara was not happy with the said marriage and therefore, he had an axe to grind against the deceased Mani. It is also alleged that, during Gowri Festival, the appellants/accused persons took shamiyana and Jamakhana for rent, but while returning the said Shamiyana, they failed to return one Jamakhana and they also did not pay the entire rental. In this context Mani was often demanding the appellants for return of the said jamakhana as well the amount due for having taken the shamiyana for rent.

5. It is the further case of the prosecution that, the appellants were dodging payment of said money and they were teasing said Mani by threatening him by saying that they are so powerful as to refuse payment of money and return of jamakhana. On the basis of the above said motive, it is alleged that on 27.10.2006, there was galata between the deceased Mani and the appellants/accused persons viz., Chandra and Kumar and they assaulted Mani with an iron rod to his right arm and also on his chest. In this context, there was a case and counter case registered against each other by the respective parties.

6. It is the further case of the prosecution that with the above said motive, the accused persons were waiting for an opportunity to do away with the life of the deceased. It is stated that on 31.10.2006, at about 8.309.00 p.m. PW1 received a telephonic call from one PromodPW3, stating that Mr. Mani called him over phone and told him that, the accused persons were chasing him in a Maruti van and attacked him and stabbed his leg with a knife when he was proceeding on his Motor bike and they were chasing him on the road leading to graveyard. Thereafter deceased Mani informed PW! over phone that the accused persons assaulting him and chased him in the grave yard and that he ran to save his life. A