MEESALA RAMAKRISHAN Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal on certificate would require our decision, inter alia, on the question of evidentiary value of dying declaration made by gestures. This question arises, because from what is being stated later, it would be clear that the conviction of the appellant under S. 302, I.P.C. is principally based on dying declaration of deceased, Meesala Ramanamma alias M. Venkata Ramanamma, who was none else than the wife of the appellant. As the deceased was not in a position to speak at the relevant time her dying declaration came to be recorded by a Magistrate on the basis of some nods and gestures made by her. It is this dying declaration which has led in the main to find the appellant guilty of murder of his wife which has resulted in his being sentenced to R.I. for life - the minimum punishment provided by law.

(2.) The appellant alone had faced the trial relating to murder of his wife. The Sessions Judge, Vishakapatnam, found the appellant guilty under S. 302 and sentenced him as aforesaid. On appeal being preferred before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, the same came to be heard by a Division Bench consisting of Justice Jayachandra Reddy (as he then was) and Justice Sardar Ali Khan. The learned Judges differed in their ultimate conclusions. Justice Reddy gave the benefit of doubt and ordered to acquit the appellant. Justice Khan on the other hand was of the view that the charge of murder has been brought home and so he dismissed the appeal. On the papers being placed before the Chief Justice of the High Court, it was ordered to place the appeal for hearing before Justice Rama Rao who agreed with the view expressed by Justice Khan, because of which the appeal ultimately came to be dismissed by the High Court. However, being of the view that the case is fit for appeal to this Court on the question mentioned above, a certificate was granted under Art. 134(1)(c) of the Constitution.

(3.) Before addressing ourselves on the question on which certificate has been granted, we have to see whether the conviction as ultimately upheld by the High Court is sustainable on the basis of materials on record. As already indicated, the principal evidence is the dying declaration to which we shall advert a little later to decide whether on the basis of the declaration as made the conviction was warranted.