State argued that on the side of prosecution P.W.1 to 15 were examined, exhibits P1 to P.14 marked and M.O-1 to 12 were produced. P.W.1, who is an eye witness clearly stated about the occurrence without any contradictions. His evidence is clear and cogent and without any suspicion. The motive for the crime was that both the accused and the deceased had previous enmity due to a civil dispute. This was spoken by P.W.1, P.W.8, P.W.14. The certified copy of the civil case judgment was produced under Ex.P42. It was argued that the prosecution had categorically proved that both the accused and deceased had previous enmity. The occurrence happened in the house of P.W.4. The adjoining house owner P.W.5 and P.W.6 and the person, who had accompanied the deceased P.W.3 failed to support the prosecution due to fear. However, P.W.1 who came to Ramnad to celebrate Ramzan had witnessed the occurrence. He clearly stated that since his son had not returned from Ramnad, he came to the place of occurrence and witnessed the occurrence. He also clearly deposed before the trial Court. His evidence was supported by P.W.2. He further argued that F.I.R was registered