JUDGMENT : 1. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order. Signed order is placed on the file. 2. The appellants were tried by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram for having caused the death of deceased Das. The Sessions Judge acquitted the accused and aggrieved by the same, the State preferred an appeal before the High Court and Division Bench of the High Court reversed the acquittal of the accused and found the accused guilty of offence under section 304 Part-I and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of 7 years. The second accused was found guilty of offence punishable under section 323 and sentence of 6 months imprisonment was imposed on him. The appellants challenged their conviction and sentence. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants and counsel for the State. The incident took place on 10.7.1990 at about 6 p.m. at a place called Idichakaplamoodu - Plamoottukada within the jurisdiction of Parassala Police Station. It appears that there was a wordy altercation between the deceased Das and the first accused Sathyanesan in front of the ration shop of Sasidharan Nair. The people collected there tried to pacify the accused and the deceased but the quarrel continued. During the course of the quarrel it is alleged that A-2 fisted on the back of the deceased then A-1 drew his knife from his waist and stabbed on the right upper arm of the deceased and when deceased tried to raise his arm he again stabbed on his armpit and thereafter on the chest of the deceased. When deceased made an attempt to flee from the place, A-1 stabbed on deceased's back. On receiving the stabbed injuries deceased crunched down, fell back and died on the spot. PW1 gave statement before the Police and investigation started. Deceased was found to have as many as 8 injuries when examined by the Doctor. On the side of the prosecution PW-2, 3 and 5 were examined as eye witnesses. Learned Sessions Judge disbelieved the evidence of PW-2, 3 and 5, as some contradictions were found in their evidence. The High Court on reappreciation of the evidence found these eye witnesses trustworthy and held that the prosecution case was proved. The counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that the High Court was not justified in reversing the acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge. The High Court on reappreciation of the evidence found these eye witnesses trustworthy and held that the prosecution case was proved. The counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that the High Court was not justified in reversing the acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge. It is submitted that the Sessions Court had given cogent reasons for disbelieving the evidence of PW-2 and 5 and has found that these witnesses were residing far away from the place of incident and evidence of PW-3 was found to be unreliable. We have perused the evidence of PW-2, 3 and 5. In essential details there is clear corroboration and the evidence shows as to how the occurrence took place and the High Court was justified in placing reliance on evidence of these three witnesses. PW-3 is having a shop nearby and he was a natural witness, who gave clear account of the incident. We do not find any illegality in the conviction and sentence entered against the first accused and we confirm the same. 4. Coming to the second accused the only allegation is that he hit on the back of the deceased. There was no corresponding injury entered in the post-mortem certificate. We are told that he has already undergone imprisonment for a period of one month. He was found guilty only for the offence under section 323, Criminal Procedure Code We find that the sentence already undergone by him is sufficient to meet the ends of justice. The bail bond of A-2 is cancelled and the first accused is directed to surrender to his bail bond to serve out the remaining period of sentence. 5. The appeal is disposed of.