The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and the court's reliance on credible and reliable evidence in reaching a decision.

M. CHOCKALINGAM, J.

This judgment shall govern these two appeals viz., Crl.A.No.242/2009 filed by A1 and Crl.A.No.570/2009 filed by A2. The first accused stood charged under section 302 r/w 34 IPC and the second accused stood charged under section 302 IPC. They were tried and found guilty of the charge by the Additional District and Sessions Division,(Fast Track Court) Thiruppathur, Vellore District in S.C.No.209/2008 and awarded life imprisonment each.

2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows:

(a) P.W.2 was employed in the Armed Division as Supervisor for sending army wagons from one place to the other through Railways. During the relevant time, the deceased Bhaskar Rao was employed as a security under P.W.2 and A1 and A2 were employed as Assistant Securities. On the date of occurrence i.e., on 110. 2007, A1 and A2 along with the deceased Bhaskar Rao were sent as security for the army wagon and actually when the wagon was crossing Jollarpet, P.Ws. 4 and 5 who were vendors in the Railway Station found A1 and A2 quarrelling with the deceased and A1 and A2 attacked him on his head. They also noticed that the deceased Bhaskar Rao fell down.

(b) When the Village Administrative Officer, P.W.1 Jollarpet was in his office at 8.00 a.m. on 110. 2007, he was informed by his assistant that a dead body of a male was found in the railway track. P.W.1 along with his assistant went to the spot and found the dead body of the male. The wagons of the army were found parked just 150 feet from the place where the dead body was found. He also noticed the blood stains in the wagon. The dead body was identified by P.W.2 and other relatives of Bhaskar Rao.

(c) P.W.1 immediately proceeded to the Railway Police Station, where he gave a complaint, Ex.P1 to P.W.11, Sub Inspector of Police. On the strength of Ex.P1, P.W.11 registered a case in Crime No.499/2007. On receipt of the copy of the F.I.R, P.W.12, took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an inspection and prepared the Observation Mahazar, Ex.P2 and also recovered the material objects namely blood stained earth, M.O.1 and sample earth, M.O.2 and the other material objects. He prepared a sketch Ex.P.14. He conducted inquest on the dead body and prepared the inquest report. Pursuant to the requisition made, the dead body was subjected to post mortem.

(d) P.W.6, the doctor attached to Government Hospital, Tiruppathur conduct autopsy and gave the opinion in the post mortem certificate, Ex.P11 that the deceased died due to the injuries sustained by him on his head.

(e) Further investigation was taken up by P.W.13. Pending investigation, A1 and A2 surrendered before P.W.1 Village Administrative Officer on 112. 2007. A2 voluntarily gave confessional statement. The same was recorded by P.W.1 in the presence of his assistant. The said confessional statement was marked as Ex.P4. Both the accused were taken to the Police Station by P.W.1 and they were produced along with Ex.P4 and the report of P.W.1.

(e) On arrest, P.W.13 enquired them. The accused came forward to give confessional statement and the same was recorded. The admissible part of the confessional statement of A1 was marked as Ex.P7 and that of A2 was marked as Ex.P6. Thereafter, they produced iron rod which was marked as M.O.11 The same was recovered under a cover of mahazar Ex.P8. Both of them were sent for judicial remand. All the material objects were sent to analysis and the reports, Exs.P20 & P21 serologist report and chemical reports respectively were received and placed before the Court. On completion of the investigation, the investigating officer, filed a final report.

(f) The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Necessary charges were framed. In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses and relied on 21 exhibits and 11 material objects. On completion of the evidence on the side of the prosecution, the accused were questioned under s