IMPORTANT POINT
The court upheld the conviction of the accused for murder and related offences based on credible eyewitness testimony, while acquitting them of charges under the Arms Act due to insufficient evidence.

JUDGMENT :

(Jobin Sebastian, J.)

The accused Nos.1 to 5 in S.C.No.600 of 2016 on the file of Additional Sessions Court, Irinjalakuda has preferred this appeal assailing the finding of guilt, conviction, and sentence passed against them for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302 r/w. Section 149 of the IPC and Section 27(1) of Arms Act, 1959.

2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows:-

a) The 2nd accused humiliated the wife of PW1 through teasing and indecent conduct, prompting PW1 to reprimand him. Enraged by the rebuke, on 25.12.2015, near the rental house of PW1, the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons, with the common object of murdering PW1 and his friends, who had gathered at PW1's house to celebrate Christmas.

b) In furtherance of the common object of the assembly, the 3rd accused approached PW1 and suggested settling the dispute between him and the 2nd accused, inviting PW1 and his friends for a compromise talk. Trusting the words of the 3rd accused, PW1, accompanied by his friends Sreejith (CW2), Prasanth (CW3), Melwin, and Viswajith, proceeded to Nandhikkara-Mapranam Road for the talk. While they were in conversation with the accused, the 1st accused abruptly drew a sword and struck CW2. When CW1 intervened upon seeing this, the 1st accused hacked him with the sword. The 2nd and 3rd accused then brutally assaulted Melwin and Viswajith using iron pipes, while the 4th and 5th accused incessantly beat them with wooden sticks. The 1st accused proceeded to hack Melwin and Viswajith with the sword, and the 5th accused assaulted CW3 with his bare hands. Accused Nos. 6 to 12 assisted accused Nos. 1 to 5 by preventing the injured from escaping the crime scene. PW1’s friends, Melwin and Viswajith, succumbed to their injuries at the spot.

c) The accused are alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and Section 27(1) of the Arms Act.

3. After completion of the investigation, final report was submitted before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakuda. Being satisfied that the case is one triable exclusively by a Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate, after complying all the necessary formalities, committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Thrissur, under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C. After taking cognizance, the learned Sessions Judge made over the case for trial and disposal to Additional Sessions Court, Irinjalakuda. After trial, the accused Nos.1 to 5 were found guilty for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302 r/w. Section 149 of the IPC and Section 27(1) of the Arms Act and convicted. The remaining accused were found not guilty and acquitted.

4. Accused Nos. 1 to 5 were sentenced to two life imprisonments; one for the murder of Melwin and another for the murder of Viswajith. Additionally, they were ordered to pay separate fines with default clauses for each of the murders. Separate sentences were also imposed on accused Nos. 1 to 5 for every other offence for which they were found guilty and convicted. However, the substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. This judgment of conviction and order of sentence is challenged by way of this appeal.

5. The prosecution in its bid to prove the charge levelled against the accused has altogether examined 27 witnesses, as PW1 to PW27, and exhibited and marked as Exts.P1 to P51. MO1 series to MO21 series were marked and identified. The contradictions brought out by the defence in the statement of prosecution witnesses were marked as Exts.D1 to D4. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused were questioned under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. and they denied all the incriminating materials brought out against them in evidence. From the side of the accused, DW1 and DW2 were examined and marked Exts.D1 to D11 including the contradiction