HELD: The High Court found that that PWs 1 to 3 had occasion to see the photographs and read the name of the accused from the newspaper prior to the test identification parade. So far as PW-8 is concerned, the High Court found that his evidence was at variance with that of PWs 1 and 2 and had also lacked reliability. He claimed to be a person who had seen the accused after some time of the incident with a blood stained knife. But his conduct was found to be unnatural. If he was the only person to have seen the accused from close quarters, it was not explained why he did not say so during investigation. Such a version for the first time in Court has been rightly discarded by the High Court. The view taken by the High Court after analyzing the evidence cannot be said to be a view which is not possible to be taken. Thus, the appeal is not interfered with. [Paras 4, 7 and 8] [122- C; 123-A; 122-D,E; 123-B]

S. Thananjayan for ths Appellant.

K.V. Viswanathan, B. Ragunath, K.V. Venkataraman and K.V. Vijayakumar for