Unfortunately, however, the Doctor who appears to have been transferred immediately after recording dying declaration, forgot to send the giving declaration to the police and it got mixed up in his papers.
The High Court as also the Sessions Judge have given a detailed narration of prosecution case which was a result of enmity between the parties.
The High Court has believed the dying declaration.
It was only when the case reached the trial stage that the dying declaration was summoned from the doctor, who also appeared and proved its companytents.
P.W. I who was accompanying him was also assaulted.
The evidence of the doctor has been believed by the High Court and we see numberreason to differ from the view taken by the High Court as the doctor was an independent person.
Apart from the witnesses who had supported the prosecution case, P. W. 1 who was himself injured, was a star witness and there was numberreason to disbelieve his evidence particularly when it was fully companyroborated by the dying declaration.
The accused made a suggestion that the thumb impression of the deceased appears to have been taken by the police on a blank paper and was companyverted into a dying declaration.
The High Court, therefore, relied on their evidence since it was companyroborated by the dying declaration which was recorded by Dr. Kapur on 12 9 1968 at 11.00 am.
Some litigations were pending between the deceased Jas Karan on one side and the appellants on the other side.
The only challenge of the declaration by the accused was that it was produced for the first time at the trial.
It is said that while the deceased was going to companyrt on the 12thSeptember, 1968 he was surrounded by the appellants on the way and assaulted by them with kantas and lathis.
In support of its case the prosecution examined a number of witnesses of whom the eye witnesses were P. W. 1 Badri, P. W. 3 Tiwari, P W. 4 Sita Ram and P. W. 5 Sri Pal and P. W. 6 Smt.
Thus impliedly the defence admitted that the thumb impression on the dying declaration was that of the deceased.
Defence of the accused was that they bad been falsely implicated due to enmity.
Murtaza Fazal Ali, J. In this appeal by special leave the appellants have been companyvicted under Sections 302/34, 324/34 and one 323/34 and have been sentenced to life imprisonment, one years rigorous imprisonment and six months rigorous imprisonment respectively.
