1. These appeals arise from S.C.No.134 of 2010 on the files of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge - V, Thiruvananthapuram. There are two accused in the case and they stand convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under S.294(b), S.341, S.307 and S.302 read with S.34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Among the appeals, Crl.Appeal No.976 of 2019 is preferred by the first accused and Crl.Appeal No.199 of 2019 is preferred by the second accused.

2. The accused were persons residing in the neighbourhood of the house of the victims namely, Shaji who died in the occurrence which is the subject matter of the case and the wife of Shaji namely, Jayasree who suffered serious injuries in the occurrence. The genesis of the occurrence is that Shaji directed a few youngsters who were sitting in a car which was parked in front of his house to remove the same owing to their conduct in passing comments at people walking by in front of his house. At about 10.30 p.m. on 27/03/2009, there occurred an altercation in front of the house of Shaji over the objection raised by Shaji as mentioned above and it is in that altercation, Shaji and his wife suffered serious injuries. Although Shaji and his wife were taken immediately by the neighbours to Sree Gokulam Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, by the time they reached the said hospital, Shaji passed away.

3. A case was registered against the accused at 6 a.m. on the following day by Kilimanoor Police in connection with the occurrence under S.294(b), S.341, S.307 and S.302 read with S.34 IPC based on information furnished by Jayasree at the hospital where she was undergoing treatment at 4.30 a.m. on that day. In the investigation conducted in the said case, it was revealed that at about 10.30 p.m. on 27/03/2009, the first accused came in front of the house of the victims and started abusing them using filthy language and when Shaji came out of the house hearing the said abuse and enquired with the first accused the reason for the same, the first accused stabbed him as also his wife multiple times with a foldable knife, with the support and protection of the second accused.

4. On the accused being committed to trial after their arrest pursuant to the final report filed in the case, the Court of Session framed charges against them under S.294(b), S.341, S.307 and S.302 read with S.34 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty. The evidence let in by the prosecution thereupon consists of the oral evidence of 19 witnesses and 35 documents proved through them. MOs 1 to 17 are the material objects in the case. In the course of the evidence let in by the prosecution, Exts.D1 to D5 contradictions were proved by the defence. Inasmuch as the Court of Session did not find the case to be one fit for acquittal under S.232 of the Code, the accused were called upon to enter on their defence. At that stage, the second accused examined one Saifudeen as a witness on his side. On an appreciation of the evidence on record, the Court of Session found the accused guilty of the charges, convicted and sentenced them, among others, to imprisonment for life. The accused are deeply aggrieved by their conviction and sentence in the case, hence these appeals.

5. As per order dated 08/04/2019 in Crl.M.Appl.No.1 of 2019 in Crl.Appeal No.199 of 2019, this Court suspended the execution of the sentence passed against the second accused and enlarged him on bail.

6. Heard Adv.C.P.Udayabhanu for the first accused Adv.A.Rajasimhan for the second accused. Sri.Alex M.Thombra addressed arguments on behalf of the State.

7. The point that falls for consideration is whether the conviction and sentence of the accused are sustainable in law.

8. The prosecution relies mainly on the oral evidence of the wife, mother and daughter of Shaji who were examined as PWs 1, 2 and 3 respectively to prove the occurrence. The prosecution also relies on the evidence tendered by PW6, namely the neighbour of the victims to corroborate the evide