SHELAT J.M.,J.

(1) -THE appellant and one Javitri were tried by the Sessions Judge, Etah, on the charge of their having killed one Rampa at about 4 p. m. on 10/05/1965, while she was watching the mango trees in her grove. The Sessions Judge gave tlie benefit of doubt to the two accused and acquitted them. On appeal by the State of Uttar Pradesh, the High court sustained the order of acquittal of Javitri, but on assessment by it of the evidence on record set aside the order of acquittal in favour of tlie appellant, convicted him under S. 302 of the Penal Code and imposed upon him the sentence of death. This bein.g a case where the sentnce of death has been imposed after reversal of the order of aequitlal passed by the Sessions Judge, this appeal is as of right under Article 134(1) (a) of the Constitution.

(2) THE deceased Rampa, a widow; was, prior to her death, possessed of certain agricultural lands including the said mango grove. She had no children and therefore if she were to die without disposing of her said properties, the said Javitri, also a widow, would have been her nearest next of kin and inherited Rampas properties. The appellant is one of t