The eyewitness testimonies were credible and sufficient to establish the guilt of the appellants. The lack of a certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act rendered the CCTV footage inadmissible. Discrepancies in witness testimonies are common and do not undermine the prosecution's case.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Madurai made in S.C.No.147 of 2015 dated 06.02.2019.)

R. Subramanian, J. & N. Sathish Kumar, J.

This appeal has been filed by the appellants/ accused Nos.1 and 3 as against the conviction and sentence, dated 06.02.2019, made in S.C.No.147 of 2015, by the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Madurai.

2. The appellants/A1 and A3 stood convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment as detailed hereunder:

(Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.)

3. The brief facts of the prosecution is as follows:

(i) Accused 1 and 3 are friends. The deceased along with A1 and other accused murdered one Kalidas in the year 2005. In that case, A1 and one Anees alone were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment and in that case, the deceased Mannarmydheen was acquitted and hence, both are inimical. When the matter stood thus, the deceased assaulted the nephew of A1, for which the deceased was arrested and released on bail. The above incident also aggravated the strain in the relationship. A2 was arrested in connection with the murder case of one Paramakudi Murugan. He was under the impression that the deceased in this case was an instrumental for his arrest by the police. Therefore, A2 has also animosity against the deceased. Due to such animosity, on 21.01.2014, at about 11.00 a.m., when the deceased went to feed his goats, which were kept near the shop of P.W.3, A1 attacked the deceased with knife on the head and stomach. A3 caught hold the deceased and A2 also caused several cut injuries, which was witnessed by P.W.1 to P.W.3 and P.W.16. When P.W.1 and others made an attempt to prevent such attack, the accused threatened them with deadly weapons and thereafter, left the place. With the help of P.W.9, the deceased was immediately taken to hospital in an Auto and P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.9 followed the Auto in a Motorcycle. The Doctor declared the deceased dead. The above incident of hacking by A1 and A2 and its facilitation by A3 who held the deceased was witnessed by P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.16. After the Medical Officer informed that the deceased had already died, P.W.1 went to the police station and lodged Ex.P1-compliant.

(ii) P.W.3 is running a Tea shop in the place of occurrence and on the date of occurrence, A1 and A3 came there and A3 caught hold of the deceased and the accused have caused injuries. Immediately, P.W.3 informed the incident to P.W.20 one Fiaz. P.W.20 also rushed to the spot. P.W.5 has also seen that the accused were fighting with the deceased in the place of occurrence. P.W.6 also rushed to the spot and immediately, called the ambulance. As the arrival of the ambulance was delayed, they took the deceased in an Auto.

(iii) P.W.7 was working in M.R.Transport and in his presence, hard disc of the CCTV camera was seized by the police under M.O.6. P.W.9-Masthan Kani took the deceased to the hospital. P.W.10 also rushed to the spot and took the deceased in an Auto and went to the hospital. P.W.11 is a Traffic Constable and in his evidence, he has stated that on hearing a news that a person lying with cut injuries, he went to the place of occurrence and informed the same to the control room. P.W.16 witnessed the occurrence and according to him when he and P.W.2 went to Vignesh Store for recharging mobile phone, P.W.1 was present near the Vignesh Store. At that time, in the opposite side, A1 and A2 caused cut injuries while A3 held the deceased in front of P.W.3's shop.

(iv) P.W.25-the Inspector of Police,