Somarajan, J.

1. These are the two appeals preferred against the conviction and sentence imposed by judgment dated 12.12.2012 in S.C.No.842 of 2007 of the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc II), Kasaragod. Crl.A.No.533 of 2013 is preferred by accused No.2 and Crl.A.No.506 of 2015 by accused No.1. They were charged under Sections 341 and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The prosecution case is that the accused persons, in search of a job, came to Kasaragod District from the southern district of Kerala about one month prior to the alleged incident. On 30.8.2002 at about 8 p.m., accused No.1 came to the house of PW8 one Janaki while she was alone in that house and sat on the front veranda of the house. On seeing this, the deceased Babu and one Viswanathan interfered and asked him to leave the place. In order to wreak vengeance, on the next day by 7 p.m., accused Nos.1 and 2 restrained the deceased Babu and beat on his head with a wooden stick. On hearing the screaming, PW1 and PW2 rushed to the place and removed the injured to the Government Hospital, Kasaragod and then to Mangalore Hospital and while undergoing treatment, he succumbed to the injuries at 00.20 hours on 2.9.2002. PW1 thereon went to the Manjeswaram Police Station and gave Ext.P1 FIS, based on which, PW15, S.I. of Police, Manjeswaram, registered Ext.P1(a) FIR. After the completion of investigation, final report was submitted and accused Nos.1 and 2 were charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 341 and 302 read with Section 34 IPC.

3. The learned Sessions Judge found both the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 341 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- with a default sentence of two years each for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. The accused were also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each for the offence under Section 341 IPC, with a direction to pay the fine amount to PW6, wife of the deceased, as compensation by its judgment dated 12.12.2012.

4. The prosecution has examined PW1 to PW17, marked Exts.P1 to P14 and identified MO1 wooden stick. There are two occurrence witnesses examined as PW1 and PW2. They identified the weapon used for inflicting the injury as MO1. PW3 and PW4 turned hostile. PW6 is the wife of the deceased. PW8 is Janaki who was examined to prove the motive behind the crime. PW9 is the witness to Ext.P3 scene mahazar.

5. PW1, one of the occurrence witnesses, who gave Ext.P1 FIS, was subjected to a lengthy cross examination and nothing was brought out to discredit his oral evidence. On the other hand, he had given vivid picture of what actually happened at the place of occurrence. According to him, he had seen the alleged incident and he came to the place of occurrence on hearing the screaming by about 7.30 p.m. from his house and he had seen accused Nos.1 and 2 along with the deceased. Accused No.2 Madhu caught hold of the deceased Babu and accused No.1 beat on his head with a wooden stick. Thereon, the deceased fell on the ground. CW4 Suresh and CW3 Gopalakrishnan Nair also came to the place of occurrence. Accused Nos.1 and 2, on seeing this, ran away from the place of occurrence. The injured was immediately removed to the Government Hospital, Kasaragod by hiring a jeep. He was referred to the Mangalapuram Hospital and accordingly, he was taken to that hospital and he succumbed to the injuries on the next day. PW1 has also witnessed the inquest conducted on the body of the deceased and Ext.P2 is the inquest report. He had also identified MO1 wooden stick used for inflicting injury to the deceased and witnessed preparation of Ext.P3 mahazar. He had undergone a very lengthy cross examination. Nothing was brought out to discredit his oral testimony and no contradiction or material omission was brought out. Even no suggestion was put up to show any ill