S. Nagamuthu, J.

This is a case in connection with the brutal killing of four persons, in a gruesome manner. Having passed sentence of death by judgment dated 26.12.2012 in S.C.No.59/2007, the learned II-Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, has submitted the proceedings to this Court, under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The details of sentences imposed are as follows:

Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the accused have come-up with Crl.A. (MD)No.19/2013.

2. Earlier, in the month of January, 2013, we heard both the matters, jointly, during which we found that the investigation in this case was far from satisfactory, inasmuch as legally acceptable evidences were not adequately collected during the investigation and so, by order dated 31.01.2013, we directed further investigation to be done in the case and as suggested by the learned Public Prosecutor, we entrusted the task of further investigation to one Mr.P.Mahendran, Additional Superintendent of Police (Crimes) Tirunelveli District. [Vide 2013-1 L.W. (Crl.) 134].

3. On completing further investigation, Mr.Mahendran filed an additional Report to this Court. Based on the said report, the learned Public Prosecutor preferred to examine additional witnesses and also to prove additional documents. Accordingly, before this Court, 6 (six) additional witnesses were examined on the side of the prosecution as P.W.31 to P.W.36 and 8 (eight) documents were proved as Ex.P41 to Ex.P-48. Then, we questioned the accused in respect of the incriminating evidences adduced additionally, as stated supra, as required under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused disputed the facts stated by the additional witnesses and also the facts sought to be proved by means of additional documents. Thereafter, we heard the learned State Public Prosecutor Mr.Shanmughavelayutham and the learned counsel for the accused. That is how, both the matters are now before us for decision.

4. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows:

(a) There were four deceased in this case, namely, Mr.Jayakumar @ Muthalali (hereinafter referred as "D-1"); Shamughathai (hereinafter referred to as "D-2"); Indira (hereinafter referred to as "D-3") and Bhuvaneshwari @ Chitra (hereinafter referred to as "D-4"). All, the four unfortunate deceased, belonged to the same family. D-1 and D-2 are husband and wife, D-3 and D-4, aged about 10 and 8, respectively, are their children. All the deceased were residing in a farm house in a farm known as "Sabari

Farm", in a village known as "Kailasaperi".

(b) The 1st accused Katturaja had his land adjacent to the above farm. The wife of the 1st accused used to visit the said land. During such visits, the wife of the 1st accused used to talk to D-1, for quite some time. P.W.17 was the then Manager of the Farm. On noticing D-1 and the wife of the 1st accused talking in suspicious circumstances, he reprimanded D-1. This came to the knowledge of the 1st accused. The first accused too suspected that D-1 had illicit intimacy with his wife. This is projected to be the motive for the occurrence.

(c) P.W.1 is the sister's son of D-1. He was then residing in Pudhupettai village. P.W.3 is the father of D-2. D-1 had a brother by name Maharajan. Some time before 19.04.2007, there was a quarrel between the brother of D-1 Mr.Maharajan and the villagers. This was because Mr.Maharajan had abducted the wife of one Mr.Mathi, a Very Important Person in the said village. Taking exception to the said conduct of Maharajan, the villagers had developed enmity towards D-1 and Maharajan. P.W.3 came to know that some of the villagers had planned to kill D-1 as well as Maharajan, if they were to come to the village festival.

(d) Quite naturally, P.W.3 was worried about the same. According to him, therefore, on 19.04.2007, he came to the farm house of D-1 with a view to request D-1 not to go for the village festival, which was scheduled to happen on the next day. But, D-1 was not available