DANDU LAKSHMI REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the fact situation of a case such as this, a judicial mind would tend to wobble between two equally plausible hypothesis - was it suicide, or was it homicide If the dying declaration projected by the prosecution gets credence the alternative hypothesis of suicide can be eliminated justifiably. For that purpose a scrutiny of the dying declaration with meticulous circumspection is called for. It must be sieved through the judicial cullender and if it passes through gauzes it can be made the basis of a conviction, otherwise not.

(2.) The traditional assumption that a dying person would not stoop to speak falsehood is now sought to be played down by the counsel for the appellant on the premises that it is a pedantic notion as the said assumption is fraught with the danger of insulating even a vengeful statement made by a dying person. Learned counsel submitted that at any rate the dying declaration projected by the prosecution in this case would not stand the test of credibility.

(3.) There can be a presumption that testimony of a competent witness given on oath is true, as the opposite party can use the weapon of cross-examination, inter alia, for rebutting the presumption. But a dying declaration is not a deposition in Court. It is neither made on oath nor in the presence of an accused. Its credence cannot be tested by cross-examination. Those inherent weaknesses attached to a dying declaration would not justify any initial presumption to be drawn that the dying declaration contains only the truth.