IMPORTANT POINT
The factum of ear studs having been removed from the person of victim by cutting her ears lobes by the appellant is proved by dying declarations of deceased to PWs 1, 2 and 3 who are natural witnesses is sufficient to uphold the conviction of appellant under Sections 302 and 397 IPC which is recorded concurrently by Courts below.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 302 and 397-Accused-appellant causing injuries by stone and sickle on Venkayamma for removing her ear studs-Deceased telling the incident to PW 1, PW 2, PW 3 viz. her sister, another watchman of garden and a shepherd-Medical evidence corroborating dying declaration on injuries by appellant and removal of ear studs-Trial Court as well as High Court concurrently holding appellant liable for conviction under Sections 302 and 397 IPC-Appeal against to Supreme Court-Whether dying declarations are sufficient in this case, ignoring recoveries of blood stained ear studs, stone, sickle and shirt of accused? (Yes)-Appeal dismissed (Evidence Act, 1872-Sections 27 and 32).
       Held : The three eye-witnesses have positively stated that the deceased was speaking when they had met her soon after the incident. The victim had died two days after the incident. We cannot in the face of this positive evidence just assume that the injured must have become unconscious and speechless because of the injuries and discard on such assumption the dying declaration deposed to by independent witnesses corroborated by the promptly lodged FIR. (Para 8)
       In our opinion, the dying declaration made by the deceased, which finds amply proved by the testimony of PWs 1, 2 and 3, is by itself enough to sustain the conviction of the accused-appellant. The ear lobes of Venkayamma were cut. PW 1 proves that the deceased Venkayamma used to wear ear studs which were stolen away in the incident. So far as the recovery from the accused is concerned the witnesses to the recovery namely, PWs 7 and 8 have not supported the prosecution case and therefore the recovery is rendered doubtful. However, the factum of ear studs having been removed from the person of the victim by cutting her ear lobes is proved. The cause of death of the victim is inseparably connected with the removal of ear studs, and therefore, the commission of the offences under Sections 302 and 397 of IPC is also inextricably inter-connected in the facts and circumstances of the case. It can safely be held that the accused was responsible for causing injuries to Venkayamma and was also responsible for removing the ear studs. We do not consider it necessary to deal with evidence relating to recovery of blood-stained shirt and blood-stained stone and sickle with which the injuries are said to have been caused to the victim. We find no infirmity in the conviction of the accused-appellant and the sentences passed thereon which are maintained and the appeal is dismissed. (Paras 11, 12 and 13)

JUDGMENT

R.C. Lahoti, J.-This appeal by special leave preferred by the sole accused-appellant lays challenge to his conviction under Sections 302 and 397 IPC by Additional Sessions Judge, Ongole, maintained in appeal by the High Court. The sentence passed on the appellant is imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year, for offence under Section 302 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for seven years for offence under Section 397 IPC.

2. The prosecution case found proved by the trial Court and the High Court is that the deceased Venkayamma @ Rathamma, age about 70 years, resident of village Edugundiapadu (P.S. Maddipadu) was collecting the branches of trees at about 10 a.m. on 8.7.1994 in the garden known as Subabul Garden belonging to PW 4. The accused who was employed as watchman by the owner of the garden came to the garden and found the deceased alone. She was wearing bangles which assuming to be of gold were asked for by the accused which the deceased refused to give saying that the same were of brass. Then the accused demanded the pair of ear studs which the deceased was wearing. She refused to part with the ear studs. The accused picked up a piece of stone and with it hit on the head of the deceased as a result of which she fell down. The accused took the sickle from the deceased and inflicted injuries on the person of the deceased with sickle. He also cut the ear lobes of the deceased with the sickle so as to remove the ear studs. In this process the clothes of the accused got stained with blood. The accused then left the garden. While leaving the garden he was noticed by PW 2, another watchman of the garden, and PW 3, shepherd. At the same time PWs 2 and 3 heard some noise emanating from inside the garden whereupon they entered the garden and found the deceased lying injured. On questioning, the injured narrated the incident as had taken place with her and naming the accused-appellant. PW 1 is the sister of the deceased living in the same village who also rushed to the place of the incident upon learning about the incident. To her also the deceased narrated what had happened to her. The deceased named the accused to PW1 also. The injured was removed to government hospital, Ongole and admitted for treatment. PW 10, the duty doctor found the following injuries on the person of Venkayamma :

1. Incised wound 1" x 1/4. 3" below right ear. Blood oozing from it.

2. Cut injury 1" x 1/2" in lower part of both ears. Ear lobes lost.

3. Red contusion 6" x 4" right side of the neck.

4. Red contusion 2" x 2" on right side of the head 4" above right ear.

5. Contusion 2" x 1" at left eye.

3. Venkayamma, when examined by the doctor, was unconscious. She was unable to speak and was not moving her left upper and lower limbs. Two days thereafter she died. The post-mortem examination confirmed a number of injuries having been suffered by the deceased internally consequent upon the external injuries. In the opinion of the doctor performing post-mortem, contusions on the person of Venkayamma could have been caused by stone while incised wound and cut injury could have been caused by sickle. The head injury was the cause of death.

4. The duty head constable of Ongole police station, having learnt of the incident, reached the hospital soon after the admission of the injured thereat. As the injured was not in a position to give a statement, the head constable recorded the statement of PW 1 which was sent to the police station and registered as first information report of the incident on 8.7.1994 at 7 a.m.. Initially an offence under Section 394 IPC was registered which on the death of the injured was converted into one under Sections 397 and 302 of IPC.

5. On 16.7.1994, at about 5 p.m., PW 15, the sub-inspector arrested the accused in the presence of PW 7 and PW 8. A pair of ear studs was recovered from

Click Here to Read the rest of this document