1. Ten accused persons were tried by the Sessions Judge, Tellicherry for the offences punishable under Ss 147,148, 302 and 326 I. P. C. The charge against them was that they had formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of murdering three persons Kayanhi, Anduman and Assainar and in prosecution of that common object caused death of Kayanhi and Anduman and also caused grievous hurt to Assainar (Pw. 4). Accused 1, 4 and 9 were convicted under S.302 read with S.149 for the murder of Kayanhi and Anduman and sentenced to two terms of rigorous imprisonment for life. There is also a conviction under S.326 read with S.149 for causing grievous hurt to pw. 4 for which they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The remaining accused were acquitted. Criminal Appeal 242 is by the convicted accused and 282 is by the State against the order acquitting the others.

2. The deceased Anduman and Kayanhi and Assainar are direct brothers. They were bad characters and several complaints were filed against them by the people of the locality. Security proceedings were started against them and there was an order for their daily appearance in the Kasaragod Police Station. The three brothers were prosecuting the second accused and his people who were living in their neighbourhood. Peelings between them and the accused became strained and it is the prosecution case that on .3112 1961 while the brothers were on their way to the police station the accused who were lying in wait for them behind a vacant shop surrounded them and beat them with iron rods and sticks. Kayanhi died on the spot within fifteen minutes and the other two who were lying injured were removed to the Kasaragod Hospital by pw. 14 the Sub-Inspector who arrived at the spot on getting the information. As the condition of Anduman and pw. 4 were serious their dying declarations were recorded by the Magistrate. Anduman succumbed to his injuries at 9 in the night the same day and Assainar had to be treated in the hospital for about five months for his injuries.

3. All the accused pleaded not guilty. They denied their presence and participation in the occurrence and contended that they had been falsely implicated by Poyakkara Abdulrahiman Haji who is an inveterate enemy of the second accused.

4. The prosecution sought to prove its case by the evidence of pw.1 the fourteen-year old son of pw. 4, pw. 2 the father-in-law of the deceased Kayanhi, pw. 3 the first informant (another eye-witness), pw. 4 Assainar one of the injured and Ext. P-2 the dying declaration of Anduman. It is not necessary to scan the evidence of pws.1 to 4 as their evidence has been elaborately discussed by the learned Sessions Judge who found it not safe to be acted upon for very good reasons. pw. i had met Poyakkara Haji (who is found to have played a prominent part at the investigation stage and tried to implicate innocent persons) before he was contacted by the police and had improved freely upon his case diary statements and there are unmistakable indications of the boy having been tutored. pw. 2 is a chance witness, deeply interested in the prosecution and the learned judge disbelieved him when he said that Kayanhi (who was not in a position to talk) had himself mentioned to him the names of all the accused. pw. 3 the first informant admitted that he went straight from the scene to Poyakkara Haji with whom he had a talk before he proceeded to the police station to give the first information statement. According to his evidence before court the assailants were Sooppi Kutty, Kulangara Mammunhi, Moideen Haji, Abdul Khader son of Thuruthi Abdur Rahiman, Mammunhi son of Beeran and Anthunhi son of Seethi and he did not see any of the accused at the scene. In Ext. P-1 he had mentioned only eight persons as the accused and they are accused 2 to 5 and 9, Andunhi son of Abdurahiman, President Ibrahim and Muhammad Kunhi and he had to admit that those names were mentioned at t