- (1.) We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the relevant material.
(2.) The accused-appellant who has been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code has challenged his conviction and the sentence of life imprisonment imposed by the learned trial Court, which has been affirmed, in appeal, by the High Court.
(3.) PW-1 (Peter) is the only eye-witness to the occurrence. He is also the complainant in the case and the brother of the deceased. According to PW-1, on the day of the occurrence, while he was returning with his brother on a motor-cycle, A-1 (appellant-Killer Thiayagu @ Thiyagu) stopped them. After they had alighted from the vehicle, A-1 is alleged to have exhorted the other persons accompanying him to assault/attack the deceased. Thereafter, according to PW-1, A-1 caused a knife injury on the leg of the deceased, whereas the other accused-persons assaulted the deceased with knife and other lethal weapons on different parts of the body, including neck, resulting in his death. In the F.I.R. lodged, PW-1 did not specifically name any of the other persons who were accompanying A-1 and who had caused the other injuries to the deceased. In evidence, however, he mentioned the names of A-2 (Samiyar @ Ramu), A-3 (Moses) and A-4 (Muthumari) as the other persons involved in the crime. In cross-examination, he tried to fill up the aforesaid lacuna by stating that he was confused and under tension at the time of commission of offence by the accused.;