A dying declaration can serve as the sole basis for conviction if deemed credible, regardless of the absence of the accused or challenges to witness reliability.

JUDGMENT :

1. List revised. No one is present to press the appeal on behalf of the appellant.

2. Sole appellant, Ashraf, son of Abdul Ghaffar, is being reported to have died as back as in the year 2018 and Amicus Curiae was appointed. After perusal of the entire order-sheet, on 19.3.2025 following order was passed :

“1. List revised.

2. No one is present to press this appeal on behalf of the appellant. 3. After the death of original counsel appearing for the appellant in the year 2014 itself notices were issued to the sole appellant to engage another counsel.

4. As per office report dated 22.05.2024, the sole appellant had shifted to Delhi and has not returned and according to the local residence the appellant (Ashraf) died in Delhi. His report, however, could not be verified. Vide order dated 21.02.2018, Sri Arvind Kumar Srivastava was appointed Amicus Curiae but he is not present.

5. On 24.10.2018, the following order was passed:

"Learned A.G.A. has filed an affidavit of compliance pursuant to the order dated 13.9.2018, the same is taken on record.The report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budaun dated 11.10.2018 is on record indicating the fact that the appellant's whereabouts could not be known who had left for New Delhi twenty years ago. The enquiry was conducted by recording the statements of the family members of the appellant Ashraf and all have consistently stated about that they cannot say about as to whether he is dead or alive. In this view of the matter we proceed to hear the Amicus Curiae who is representing the appellant Ashraf.

However, at the request of the learned counsel who is appearing in connected Criminal Appeal No. 1238 of 1983 the case is adjourned. Let the case be listed on 14th November, 2018 for hearing before the appropriate Bench."

6. The above quoted order clearly reflects that the family members are not aware of his whereabouts and they could not verify as to whether he is dead or alive. The only statement of family members on record is to the effect that the appellant was of criminal nature and had gone to Tis Hazari Court to attend proceedings on 17.09.1990, however, did not return thereafter from the Tis Hazari Court and they have never seen him thereafter. He had also not come to attend the death ceremony of his close relative as well. The informant has also died as per report submitted by Ashok Kumar, Sub Inspector, Police Station Kotwali, District Budaun before the Chief judicial Magistrate, Budaun. It is also on record that Ashraf was facing criminal cases in Delhi as well.

7. On perusal of the report dated 20.02.2024 written by Chief judicial Magistrate to Senior Superintendent of Police reflects that the information regarding sureties was demanded, however, the report is not available on record.

8. Office is directed to send the details of sureties.

9. We have also perused the report dated 29.03.2024. According to which the bail bonds of sureties are not available in the lower court record. The Letter numbers 6499 and 14698A have been sent to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budaun, to find out the said bail bonds. No further report is on record.

10. Office is directed to send a rem