TATA RAVI Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have the advantage of perusing the judgments prepared by the learned Judges. After going through the judgments, one learned Judge came to the conclusion that the contents of two dying declarations marked as Exs.A-20 and A-29 cannot be relied upon since the contents of those documents have not been put to accused. Therefore, due to lapse of seven years, it would not be just to remand the case and accordingly, the conviction and sentence imposed against Accused No.1 is set aside. Another learned Judge was of the opinion that it was a fit case to remand the matter to the trial Court to enable the Court to put relevant questions to the Accused Nos.1 to 5, touching on the dying declarations Exs.A-20 and A-29.

(2.) In view of the difference of opinion with regard to the defective examination of the accused, that is to say not putting the contents of two dying declarations, the matter has been referred to the third Judge, that is why it is came up before this Court.

(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants contends that under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the incriminating circumstances have to be put to the accused to enable them to give an explanation and if the contents of a document have not been put to the accused, the same cannot be used against the accused, and therefore, except the two dying declarations, there is no other evidence. Hence, he prays to acquit the accused.