http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: SREERAMA MURTHY

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF A. P.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       29/07/1998

BENCH: G.T. NANAVATI, S.P. KURDUKAR

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       J U D G M E N T      These appeals  are filed  against the  common judgement and order  of the  High Court  of Andhra Pradesh Crl. A. No. 69/96 and Crl. A. No. 483/96.      The trial  court convicted the appellant under Sections 498-A and  304-A and 304-B IPC. in Crl. Appeal No. 69/96 the appellant challenged  his conviction.  As he  was  acquitted under Section 302 IPC, the State filed Crl. A. No. 483/96.      The High  Court  dismissed  the  appeal  filed  by  the appellant,  allowed  the  appeal  filed  by  the  State  and convicted the  appellant for the offence of murder also. The High  Court  then  observed  that  when  the  appellant  was convicted for  the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, the question  whether he  should also  be convicted  for the offence punishable under Section 304-B became academic.      It  was   the  prosecution   case  that  the  appellant committed the  death of  his wife  and daughter. In order to prove  its  case.  the  prosecution  had  examined  10  eye- witnesses and  produced three  dying declarations.  PWs 1-10 did into  support the  prosecution. The  trial court relying upon the  three dying  declarations convicted the appellant. The High  Court also  found that the three dying declaration were genuine  and truthful  and relying  upon them  held the appellant quilty.      What is  contended  by  the  learned  counsel  for  the appellant is  that the  dying declarations  - Ex.  P. 23 and Ex. P. 33 ought not to have been relied upon as they contain improvements. He  further pointed out that in the last dying declaration a  clear attempt  was made to involve the father of the  appellant who  has now  been acquitted  by the  High Court.  Because   of  some   doubt  arising   therefrom  the appellant’s father was given benefit of doubt. That does not necessarily mean  that it  was not  genuine. In any case, it does  not   have  nay   bearing  upon  the  genuineness  and truthfulness of  the first  dying declaration  -Ex.  P.  26, which was  recorded by  the Additional  First Class Judicial magistrate  after   ascertaining  the  physical  and  mental fitness of the person making It. In that declaration she has clearly stated that she was set on fire by her husband.      We see  no reason to discard that dying declaration. In

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

that view of the matter, the conviction of the appellant has to be confirmed. These appeals, are therefore, dismissed.