JUDGMENT

M.M. Sundresh, J.—The 1st appellant, who stood charged and convicted for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and appellants 2 and 3, who stood charged and convicted for offence under Section 302 r/w 34 by the Sessions Court in S.C.No.71 of 2011 on the file of Sessions Judge, Sivaganga are before this Court, seeking to set aside the same.

2. The case of the prosecution:—

(i) P.W.2 is the President of Society of Peria Pandi Kanmoi Water Users. P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 are its members. The appellants are father, son and mother. Contra to the agreed terms, the second appellant was found using water to the agricultural land. P.Ws.1 to 5 went to the land of the appellants and raised objections. It was replied by the second appellant that they can enquire the first appellant.

(ii) Thereafter, the first appellant was called and enquired in front of the residence of one Mr.Velu, near the tamarind tree and near the electric post on 25.09.2010 at about 7.30 p.m. When the deceased was questioning the first appellant, he asked the third appellant, namely, his wife to bring the knife and thereafter stabbed the deceased. At that time, the second appellant caught hold of the deceased. Thereafter, P.W.1 and others brought a car and took the deceased to Ponnamaravathi Government Hospital. There they were informed that the deceased was no more. This happened at about 9.30 p.m., pursuant to which a complaint under Ex.P.1 was given.

(iii) P.W.12 is the officer, who registered the complaint under Ex.P.8. After registration of the First Information Report under Ex.P.8, it was sent to the Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppathur at 11.30 p.m. on 25.09.2010 through P.W.11 - Head Constable. P.W.14 is the officer, who conducted the investigation initially. He thereafter prepared Ex.P.2 - Observation Mahazar and Inquest Report - Ex.P.11 and arrested all the accused and obtained their confession statement, pursuant to which recovery of M.O.3- Knife was made. The recovery mahazar is Ex.P.5. Ex.P.10 is the rough sketch and Ex.P.7 is the postmortem certificate. Finally, on completing the investigation, P.W.15 laid the charge sheet against the accused under Section 302 I.P.C.

3. Prosecution Witnesses:—

(i) P.W.1 is the father of the deceased. He has stated the case of the prosecution. He has further stated that the deceased was taken to Ponnamaravathi Government Hospital, wherein it was informed that he died. Thereafter, the complaint - Ex.P.1 was given. In his cross-examination he has stated that another Hospital was at Nerkuppai. According to P.W.1, the Accident Register has been prepared at Ponnamaravathi Hospital.

(ii) P.W.2 also deposed on the same lines. He also states that the occurrence took place during the night time and it happened under the street light. A1 asked A3 to bring the knife and thereafter A1 stabbed the deceased. The deceased was taken to Ponnamaravathi Government Hospital, wherein it was informed that he was dead. He further states that the deceased was taken to Ponnamaravathi Government Hospital by P.Ws.1 , 8 and one Ganpathy, who has not been examined. It is his further evidence that P.W.1 is his uncle.

(iii) P.Ws.3, 4 and 5 though being members of the Society, turned hostile.

(iv) P.W.6 is the wife of the deceased, whose evidence is hearsay. However, she also stated that the deceased was taken to Ponnamaravathi Government Hospital. After getting information, she went to the Hospital by bus.

(v) P.W.7 has stated that he had seen the dead body, which was also witnessed by about 20 to 25 persons.

(vi) P.W.8 is the Village Administrative Officer, who signed the Observation Mahazar - Ex.P.2. He further deposed that he has also stated to be present at the time of recovery of M.O.3.

(vii) P.W.9 is the Doctor, who has given the death intimation memo under Ex.P.6. Ex.P.6 merely records stab injury. It was signed on 25.09.2010 at about 8.30 p.m. He also admits that there is a correction in Ex.P.6 with respect to the timing. He further states that t