A jury has taken an hour and a half to clear three men charged with attacking a 21-year-old on his driveway with an axe, a machete and a knife.

The three men were found not guilty of the attempted murder of Araventham Puventhiran and causing him grievous bodily harm with intent at Kingston Crown Court on Friday, January 15.

Jeyarasingham Silambarasan, 27, of Fernlea Road, Mitcham, was also found not guilty of possessing an axe, Sinduyan Aurulselvem, 26, of Whitnell Way, Putney, was found not guilty of possessing a machete and Elanseran Balasingham, 23, of Helmsdale Road, Lambeth, was found not guilty of possessing a five-inch kitchen knife.

Although the defence agreed that somebody tried to murder or seriously harm Mr Puventhiran in the attack, all three barristers argued their clients were not present at the scene in Stoneleigh Avenue, Worcester Park, on July 22 last year.

Instead, the men insisted they had been at a friend’s barbecue in Pollards Hill, before returning home to separate addresses.

Mr Puventhiran was attacked after stepping out of his car at around 1.30am, and struck repeatedly on the head and face with an axe and a machete.

January 6: Three men deny attempting to murder 21-year-old with axe, machete and five-inch knife on driveway of his Worcester Park home

August 3: An axe, a machete and a five-inch kitchen knife: Weapons allegedly involved in street attack

He claims he managed to make it inside his porch, where he was struck again repeatedly with both weapons as well as the five-inch knife before he managed to close the door on his assailants.

During the trial, members of the jury were shown pictures of the bloodstained porch and the serious injuries sustained by Mr Puventhiran, as well as footage from a police officer’s body camera from the time she arrived at his house.

The court heard Mr Puventhiran rang around his friends immediately following the attack, who then gathered both outside his house and his hospital ward suggesting multiple possible attackers before Mr Puventhiran gave a statement to police at 5am naming the three defendants.

On January 5, defence barrister for Mr Aurulselvem, Brian St Louis, argued his client was being used as a "stooge", and said Mr Puventhiran had made a number of enemies in the area and was accusing Mr Aurulselvem and Mr Silambarasan out of spite over a previous incident.

Speaking on Thursday, January 14, defence barrister for Mr Balasingham, Anya Lewis, suggested that her client had only been accused by Mr Puventhiran either out of error or out of malice.

She said: "There are a number of possibilities. First, Mr Puventhiran knows it’s not Mr Balasingham and he’s naming him for malicious reasons connected to his friendship with the first two defendants.

"Second is that Mr Puventhiran does believe it is Mr Balasingham because that’s the word on the street. Third is that he does believe it was Mr Balasingham, but he is mistaken."

Defence barrister for Mr Silambarasan, Alistair Polson, argued that text messages sent from his client’s phone proved he was nowhere near Stoneleigh Avenue at the time of the attack.

Mr Polson also argued Mr Silambarasan had no criminal convictions, and had been in the UK since 2009 working for Tesco.

He said: "It’s the most extreme entry level offence. It would be entirely out of character for Mr Silambarasan to commit the offence he has been charged with.

"Thank God the police investigated this part of the case so properly and thoroughly. Thank goodness that a terrible miscarriage of justice can be avoided."