Ramakrishna Pillai, J.

1. The accused in S.C.No.456 of 2006 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court-II, Palakkad, are the appellants. They faced trial on a charge sheet laid by the Circle Inspector of Police, Cheruplassery, for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 302 and 397 r/w.34 IPC on the following allegations. The appellants are referred to, as they are arrayed in the impugned judgment. At about 10.30 p.m. on 6.2.2004, the accused met the deceased Saraswathi behind Plaza Theatre at Cheruplassery with an intention to have sex with her. As she refused to entertain the accused, they, in furtherance of their common intention to commit rape on her, approached her and the second accused fell over her hitting with a stone on her head and carried her to a distance of 40 metres and laid her on the path and raped her brutally. To prevent her from crying, her mouth and nose were covered and her neck was throttled knowing that she would be killed in that attempt. Thus, she was murdered. Thereafter, the accused robbed her ear studs, wrist watch and torch, thereby committing the offences as aforesaid. PW1, the son of the deceased, who received information regarding the death of his mother on the next morning, went to the place where he found his mother lying dead. Injuries were seen on the dead body. The body was found unclad with her saree pulled aside. PW1 gave Ext.P1 F.I.Statement, on the basis of which, crime was registered for suspicious death. PW23, the Circle Inspector of Police, who undertook the investigation, reached the spot, conducted the inquest and gathered materials from the body and scene of occurrence with the help of a Scientific Assistant and Police Surgeon. PW22, the District Police Surgeon, who conducted Autopsy on the body of the deceased, found that the deceased was killed by throttling and smothering. There were bodily injuries suggestive of sexual assault also. PW23 proceeded with the investigation and recorded the statement of the witnesses. The accused were arrested on 11.2.2004. Personal belongings of the deceased like watch, torch etc., were recovered on the information given by the accused. PW19 & 20, who succeeded, PW23 continued the investigation and it was PW20, who completed the investigation and laid charge against the accused.

2. The case was committed for trial by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ottappalam, in C.P.No.95 of 2005 to the Sessions Court, Palakkad. From there, it was made over to the Additional Sessions Court for trial and disposal.

3. The accused were defended by the counsel of their choice. They pleaded not guilty to the charge levelled against them. Thereafter, at the trial, on the side of the prosecution, PWs.1 to 24 were examined and Exts.P1 to P48 were marked. MOs.1 to 30 were identified. Though, after completion of the prosecution, the accused were called upon to enter on defence and tender evidence, if any, under Section 232 Cr.P.C, they did not tender any evidence.

4. The trial court, after considering the evidence on record, found the accused guilty under Sections 376, 302 and 397 r/w.37 IPC. They were convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for six months under Section 376 IPC. They were further sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-each and in default, to undergo imprisonment for six months under Section 302 IPC, with a rider that they shall not be released from prison for a period of 20 years. They were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for three months under Section 397 IPC. There was a direction that the sentence of imprisonment under Section 397 IPC shall run concurrently with the other terms of sentences awarded under Sections 376 and 302 IPC. Set off was also allowed un