The conviction based on unreliable witness testimony and unproven motive and conspiracy led to the overturning of the judgment, highlighting the necessity for credible evidence in criminal cases.

JUDGMENT :

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

Both the appeals have been preferred as against the Judgment passed in S.C.No.120 of 2018, dated 08.12.2022, on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram thereby convicting the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 120 (B) and 302 of I.P.C.

2.The case of prosecution is that there are totally eight accused and all are same family members, close relatives and friends of A.1. There is a civil dispute between one Mahamayi and A.3. The deceased had assisted Mahamayi in conducting the civil case as against A.3. The brother of A.3 was murdered and as a result, A.3 believed that the deceased was a key person involved in the murder of his brother. Therefore, A.3 had previous enmity with the deceased.

3.While being so, on 08.07.2015, A.1, A.2 and A.4 to A.8 assembled in a wine shop situated at ECR (Race Course Road) and conspired to do away with the life of the deceased. Later on, 10.07.2015, A.1, A.2, A.4, A.5, A.7 and A.8 assembled at the house of A.3 and further conspired to do away with the life of the deceased.

4.In furtherance to this conspiracy, on 12.07.2015, A.1 was waiting near the ginger tea shop situated at ECR in his two wheeler and A.4 was also waiting nearby in his two wheeler. A.5 to A.8 were waiting in their Bolero car near the tea shop with the intention of murdering the deceased. A.3 informed A.1 that the deceased had left his house. Thereafter, A.1 instructed A4 to remain in the tea shop, while A.1 and A.2 proceeded in their two wheelers and waited along the road towards Sethupathi Nagar.

5.Subsequently, A.4 informed A.1 and A.2 about the movement of the deceased in his two wheeler. Immediately, A.1 and A.2 followed the deceased. A.2 attacked the deceased from behind with a sickle, causing him to fall from his two-wheeler. A.1 then stopped his two wheeler, approached the deceased with a knife and cut his throat. The deceased sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot.

6.On the complaint, the respondent registered the F.I.R in Crime No.318 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 120 (B), 302 read with 34 of I.P.C. After completion of the investigation, the respondent filed a final report. On receipt of the said final report, the Trial Court had taken cognizance and framed charges for the offences punishable under (B), 302 read with 34 of I.P.C as against A.1 and A.2 and the Trial Court framed charges for the offences punishable under (b) read with 302 of I.P.C as against A.3 to A.8.

7.In order to bring the charges to home, the prosecution had examined P.W.1 to P.W.24 and marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.18. The prosecution also produced Material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.16. On the side of the accused, no witnesses were examined and no documents were produced before the trial Court.

8.On perusal of oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court found A.1 to A.8 guilty for the offence punishable under Section 120 (B) of I.P.C and sentenced them to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life each and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default, to undergo two years Simple Imprisonment each. A.1 and A.2 are found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C and sentenced them to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life each and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default, to undergo two years Simple Imprisonment each. Aggrieved by the same, A.1 to A.5 have filed Crl.A(MD)No.56 of 2023 and A.6 to A.8 have filed Crl.A(MD)No.4 of 2023.

9.It is stated that pending the appeal, t