Bhaskaran Pillai Sudheendra Kumar, J.

1. The appellants are the accused in S.C. No. 86 of 2009 on the files of the Sessions Court, Manjeri, who in this appeal challenges the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the court below under Sections 302, 323 and 341 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The court below sentenced each of the appellants to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each with a default clause for rigorous imprisonment for one year each under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for three months each under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC and a fine of Rs. 500/- each with a default clause for simple imprisonment for one week each under Section 341 read with Section 34 IPC. There was dispute between the appellants and the deceased Ibrahim with regard to the payment of rent in respect of the building where the appellants were residing. The said building and other tenanted buildings of the deceased are called quarters. On 17.9.2002 at about 6.30 p.m., the deceased Ibrahim went to the quarters of the appellants to collect the rent. On the way, the deceased met the appellants. The deceased demanded rent from the appellants. There was an altercation. Thereafter, the first appellant Ashraf pushed the deceased towards the western side of the quarters. He also pulled the deceased down and restrained him there. Thereafter, the first appellant sat on the chest of the deceased and fisted him. While so, the first appellant directed the second appellant to bring a knife. Accordingly, the second appellant brought a knife. Thereafter, the second appellant Navas stabbed on the nose and left side of the chest of the deceased with a knife. The deceased was immediately taken to Sukapuram Hospital at Edappal. However, on the way to the hospital, he succumbed to the injuries.

2. CW1 (not examined as he was not alive) witnessed the incident. He went to the police station and launched Ext. P18 Statement to PW21, who in turn registered Ext. P18(a) F.I.R. The investigation was taken over by PW22 on 18.9.2002. He conducted the inquest on the body of the deceased at 8.30 a.m. on that day and prepared Ext. P4 inquest report. On that day at 12.15 p.m., PW22 visited the place of occurrence and prepared Ext. P1 scene mahazar. He arrested the appellants on 18.9.2002 at 8.30 p.m. On questioning the second appellant, the second appellant had given Ext. P19 disclosure statement and pursuant to Ext. P 19 disclosure statement, MO8 knife was recovered by PW22 at the instance of the second appellant, as per Ext. P13 mahazar. After completing the investigation, PW22 laid the charge before the court.

3. In the trial, P.W. 1 to PW22 were examined and Exts. P1 to P23(a) were marked for the prosecution, besides identifying MO1 to MO8. No evidence was adduced on the side of the defence.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants Sri. T.K. Ajith Kumar and the learned Public Prosecutor Sri. K.K. Rajeev.

5. P.W. 14 is the doctor who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased and issued Ext. P 10 postmortem certificate. The following ante-mortem injuries were noted by P.W. 14 in Ext. P 10 postmortem certificate:--

"Injuries (Ante-mortem):--

1. Incised wound 2.1 x 0.5 x 1 cm at the root of nose, vertically placed. There was a cut in the nasal bone for a depth 0.7 cm.

2. Linear abrasion 5x0.2 cm on the top of right side of head 5 cm above right eyebrow and 5.5 cm outer to midline.

3. Abrasion 7x3 cm on the back of right elbow and right forearm.

4.4. Abrasion 5x1.5 cm on the back of right upper arm 3 cm above elbow.

5. Linear abrasion 5.5x0.3 cm on the outer aspect of right side of abdomen horizontally placed 13 cm outer to midline and 5 cm below costal margin.

6. Abrasion 4x1.8 cm on the front of right knee."

6. Incised penetrating wound 2.9x1.1 cm on the lower part of left side of chest obliquely placed with its upper end placed, 18 cm below axilla. The upper end was split and lower end was