JUDGMENT :

M.M. Sundresh, J.

1. Assailing the conviction and sentence rendered by V Additional District and Sessions Court Coimbatore in S.C. No. 75 of 2015, in which, the trial Court convicted the appellants/accused 1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B r/w 302, 364 r/w 120-B, 302 r/w 120-B and 201 r/w 302 IPC while acquitting them for the offence under Section 364 r/w 120-B IPC and each of them sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offences under Sections 120-B r/w 302 and 302 r/w 120-B IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each, in default to undergo R.I for six months and for the offence under Section 201 r/w 302 IPC to undergo three years R.I., and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each, in default to undergo RJ for six months, the present criminal appeal is filed by them.

2. Prosecution version:-

2.1. The appellants and the deceased-Fernandez were friends. A misunderstanding (developed between A2 and the deceased while selling Ganja. The first appellant demanded Ganja from the deceased at free of cost. On his refusal, enmity developed between them. The appellants hatched up a criminal conspiracy to kill the deceased. On 02.10.2005 at about 6.00 p.m., the appellants took the deceased-Fernandez to the Well and thereafter, stabbed and cut him with Knife and hacksaw blade respectively and caused the death of the deceased-Fernandez. After doing so, the deceased was pushed into the Well.

2.2. P.W. 1-Premarani @ Rajathi, who is the mother of the deceased, gave a complaint under Ex. P1 on 12.03.2010 at Saravanampatti Police Station. A case was registered in Crime No. 253/2010 by P.W. 35-D. Jayakumar, Sub Inspector of Police under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code for man missing and Ex. P35 is the First Information Report dated 12.03.2010. A1 was under incarceration in some other case. P.W. 7-Arumugam was also sharing the same jail with A1. A1 has told P.W. 7 about the murder committed by him and A2. Both of them came out of jail subsequently. As P.W. 7 threatened to disclose the information passed on by A1, he was attacked by A1, resulting in filing of the First Information Report dated 19.12.2013 under Ex. P38 in Crime No. 1784 of 2013 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 341 and 307 IPC. In the said complaint, P.W. 7 has stated that the motive for the occurrence was an apprehension on the part of A1 that P.W. 7 would divulge the earlier offence committed by him. Apprehending arrest, the appellants approached P.W. 3-Murugesan, who is the District General Secretary of BJP, before whom an extra judicial confession has been given. P.W. 3 informed the Police and gave a Report. Thereafter, A1 was arrested. The aforesaid happening was reduced into writing under Ex. P3-Report dated 20.12.2013. Thereafter, A2 was arrested. Pursuant to the confession statements made by the accused under Exs. P5 and P7 respectively, the Well was dug up, as it was closed, in the presence of the Revenue Officials. It was accordingly dug up spanning over a month. Ultimately, M.Os. 1 to 3 viz., faded shirt, skull and bone respectively were recovered.

2.3. Under Ex. P16-Alteration Report, the earlier complaint given was altered. The Investigating Officers completed the investigation by duly preparing Ex. P9-Observation Mahazar and Ex. P31-Inquest Report. The Material Objects were also sent for examination and both DNA test and superimposition were sought for. The superimposition would show that the skull was that of the deceased. The DNA test also tallied with that of the deceased and mother of the deceased. After completing the investigation, the charge sheet was laid.

3. The trial Court framed the charges and placed them before the accused. They accordingly denied the charges. During the trial, the prosecution has examined 37 witnesses in toto, while marking Exs. P1 to P54 along with M.Os. 1 to 3. On the part of the defence, neither any document was marked nor any witness examined. After framing charges, the appellants we