COMMON JUDGMENT

[Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.ANANTHI, J.]

These Criminal Appeals have been filed by these Appellants herein/A-5, A-2 & A-4 to set aside the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai in S.C.No.93 of 2011, dated 26.09.2018.

2.The appellants herein are arrayed as A-5, A-2 & A-4 in S.C.No.93 of 2011 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai and A-1 & A-3 in S.C.No.93 of 2011 were died.

3.All the three appeals arising out of one Judgment and therefore, common Judgment is passed in these three appeals.

4. The trial Court, vide impugned judgment dated 26.09.2018, has convicted the appellants herein/A-5, A-2 & A-4 for the above said offences and imposed the sentences, thus:

(i)The 2nd accused is found guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo Life imprisonment for the offence u/s 120(b) of IPC and convicted and sentenced to undergo for Life imprisonment for the offence u/s 302 of IPC(2 counts). (Total

3 counts).

(ii)The 4th accused is found guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo Life imprisonment for the offence u/s 120B of IPC and convicted and sentenced to undergo for Life imprisonment for the offence u/s 302 of IPC(2 counts). (Total 3 counts).

(iii)The 5th accused is found guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo Life imprisonment for the offence u/s 120(B) of IPC and convicted and sentenced to undergo for Life imprisonment for the offence u/s 302 r/w 34 of IPC(2 counts).

(Total 3 counts).

Now, challenging the conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been filed.

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

6.The learned counsel appearing for the Appellants submitted that there are material contradictions with regard to the prosecution witnesses and the versions on the exhibits. He further submit that P.W.8 who was examined as eye witness was turned hostile and he did not support the prosecution case. He further submitted that the prosecution has failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. He further submitted that there are unexplained and undue delay in sending the material documents to the Court and it is fatal to the prosecution.

7.The case of the prosecution is that the complainant Chinnaiah is residing at Mookudi Village, that the deceased A-1 and A-5 are residing Mookudi village and A-2 is residing at Serangadu in Thiruppur Police Circle, A-3 is residing at Parambur in Annavasal Police Circle, that A-2, A-3 and A-4 are the friends of A-5. The deceased in this case are namely; Vellaisamy and Sekar are the sons of the complainant Chinnaiah. A-1 is said to be the friend of the deceased Vellaisamy. On 16.12.2009, A-1 has borrowed a sum of Rs.50,000/-from the deceased Vellaisamy and executed a pronote, but he neither repaid the principal nor interest, while so A-1 was remanded in a robbery case, that the said Vellaisamy assured him to take him on bail, but he fails to do so, aggrieved that A-1 developed enmity with him, and intent to kill him, and he picked up quarrel with Vellaisamy after releasing from bail. On one occasion, three months prior to the alleged occurrence, the Vellaisamy demanded the money from A-1 in Bazaar and teased him. Aggrieved that, A-1 contacted his friends who are A-3 and A-4 in this case and conspired along with them to kill the said Vellaisamy. That being so, there existed so many disputes between the family of Vellaisamy and Sekar with A-5 with regard to political motive, tender, transfer of panchayat cheques, real estate etc. that in order to take revenge, the said A-5 contacted the A-1 and demanded his help to kill the said Vellaisamy, for that A-1 also agreed to help him, that based upon his assurance, on

12.01.2011 at 03.00 p.m., A-1 taken away A-2 & A-4 to the house of A-5 and introduced him and they conspired to commit murder of Vellaisamy and they have planned to execute th