IN THE SUPREME COURT OF  INDIA           CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION   

     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 263   OF 2008

MUDUSU SAMRAJYAM ..  APPELLANT(S)

vs.

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ..  RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

The deceased Mudusu Bhadramma was the first wife of Mudusu  

Sura Reddi. About 24 years earlier on account of  a dispute between the  

couple, Sura Reddi had deserted her and started living with the appellant,  

Samrajyam as a second wife.  The relations between the first and second  

wife  were,  as expected,  strained.   As per the prosecution story, on the  

night of 25th October,  1998 Sura Reddi had beaten the deceased and at  

about 8.30 on the next day when the deceased was taking her clothes out

of the cupboard,  the appellant  herein  poured kerosene  oil  on her  body  

whereafter  both the accused set her on fire.   On hearing the cry of the  

deceased,  Sura  Reddi  aforesaid  and  the  neighbours  who  had  been  

attracted to the place put out the fire and shifted her to the Government  

Hospital where her statement was recorded by PW.16 Head Constable at  

10.15 a.m. and on its basis the FIR was duly registered.  The  attending  

Doctor also sent a message to the police station and the police arranged  

for a  Magistrate to record the dying declaration of the deceased.  

-2-

The dying declaration was recorded on the same day by PW.19 M. Rama  

Devi.  In this statement, as well, the deceased named the appellant herein  

as the perpetrator of the crime.  The injured died on 26th of October, 1998,

and the dead body was subjected to a post-mortem examination on the  

afternoon of  the 27th October,  1998.   The  Doctor  found 70-80% second  

degree ante-mortem burn injuries from the neck to the knees and opined  

that  the cause of death was shock due to ante-mortem burn injuries.  On  

the completion of the investigation Sura Reddi aforesaid and the appellant  

Samrajyam were brought to trial.  During the course of trial most of the  

prosecution witnesses including the parents of the deceased PWs'.6 and 7  

did not support the prosecution and were declared hostile.  The trial Court,  

however, relying on the two dying declarations acquitted Sura Reddi but  

convicted and sentenced the appellant herein for an offence punishable  

under Sec.302 IPC and to a sentence of life imprisonment and a fine of  

Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.   

The  appeal  filed  by  the  appellant  before  the  High  Court  was  

dismissed.  The present appeal is before us by way of special leave.   

Ms. T.Anamika, the learned counsel for the appellant has pointed  

out  that  the  entire  prosecution  story  would  rest   on  the  two  dying

declarations, one recorded by the Head  

-3-

Constable and other by the Magistrate and if a doubt was created as to  

their veracity, the entire prosecution story would fail.  She has pointed out  

that  there  were  huge  improvements  in  the  second  dying  declaration  

recorded by the Magistrate vis-a-vis the first one and this by itself caused  

suspicion warranting the rejection of both the dying declarations.  She has  

also pleaded that in view of the medical evidence on record including the  

post mortem report, it was apparent that the injured had not been in a fit  

condition to give her statements.

The  learned  counsel  for  the  State  Ms.  Altaf  Fathima   has,  

however, supported the judgment of the courts below.   

We  agree  with  the  learned  counsel  for  the  appellant  that  the

entire case would hinge on the two dying declarations. We find that there  

are indeed substantial improvements and changes with respect to the role  

assigned to the appellant for the commission of the crime,  but both the  

dying declarations have a common content,  when it comes to the fact that  

it was the appellant who had poured the kerosene oil on the deceased and  

had set her on fire. To our mind, the improvements in the second dying  

declaration such as a narration of events prior to the actual crime or the  

history as to  what had  happened over the years  were not relevant to the  

main incident.

-4-

It  has  also  been  submitted  by  the  learned  counsel  for  the  

appellant that the medical evidence revealed that the injured was not in a  

position to have made the statements  to the Head Constable and to the  

Magistrate.   She  has  taken  us  through  the  statement  of  the  attending  

Doctor PW.15 who had treated the injured when she was in hospital prior  

to her death.  We find, however, that the Doctor, did state that she was in a  

position  to  give  her  statement.  Significantly  the  Doctor  was  not  even  

cross-examined  on  this  aspect.   We  have,  therefore,  not  the  slightest  

hesitation in accepting as true, both the dying declarations.

We accordingly dismiss the appeal.

                     .................J.          (HARJIT SINGH BEDI)

.................J.                                      (J.M. PANCHAL) New Delhi, July 29, 2009.