RAMASWAMI J. - (1.) THIS appeal is brought by special leave from the judgment of the Bombay High Court dated the 20th March, 1967 setting aside the order of acquittal of the appellant passed by the Extra-Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon on July 31, 1965 and convicting the appellant under section 307, Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years,
(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that Gangadhar Gotu Chaudhari was stabbed at about 8 p. m. on March 28, 1965 opposite to his house in village Khandale in Taluka and District Jalgaon. He fell down bleeding and was carried to his house by four or five persons. Dayaram Katu (P. W. 6) informed the police patil Gobadhu Dalpat (P. W. 2) who immediately proceeded to the spot. On inquiry Gangadhar told the police patil, P. W. 2, that the appellant had stabbed him in the abdomen in the lane in front of his house. THE police patil proceeded to Bhusaval police station and lodged first information report at about 11 p. m. the same night. THE head constable started for the village and reached Khandale at about 2 a. m. on March 29, 1965. He drew up a pancha-nama and seized certain blood-stained articles. He arranged to Bend Gangadhar to the Municipal Dispensary at Bhusaval where he was treated from March 29, 1965 to April 7, 1965. As the condition of Gangadhar became worse the Medical Officer sent him to the Civil Hospital at Jalgaon where Gangadhar died on April 8, 1965 at about 8.25 a. m. After completing the investigation the police charge-sheeted the appellant and four others under section 304 read with section 34 and section 149, Indian Penal Code. THE appellant was independently charged under section 302, Indian Penal Code, for the act of stabbing Gangadhar. THE Additional Sessions Judge disbelieved the four eye-witnesses on the ground that the statements were fabricated and inconsistent. It appears that when these witnesses were first examined on March 29, 1965 by the police they never mentioned the names of accused 2 to 5 but after the death of Gangadhar they implicated these four accused in their statement made on April 9, 1965. THE Additional Sessions Judge therefore acquitted the appellant and the other four accused of all the charges. THE State of Maharashtra preferred an appeal to the High Court against the acquittal of the appellant. THE High Court agreed with the Additional Sessions Judge that the four eye-witnesses were not reliable. But the High Court, however, believed the two dying declarations of the deceased Gangadhar, the first made to the police patil incorporated in Ex. 7 and the second made to the Police Sub-Inspector on March 29, 1965, Ex. 26 at the Bhusaval Municipal Dispensary. THE High Court considered that these two statements were true and genuine and on the basis thereof convicted the appellant of the charge under section 307, Indian Penal Code. It was argued on behalf of the appellant that the High Court was not justified in basing the conviction of the appellant on the dying declaration of Gangadhar after having rejected the evidence of the four eye-witnesses as unreliable. It was said that the dying declaration of Gangadhar ought not to have been acted upon unless there was sufficient corroboration thereof. We are unable to accept this argument as well founded. It cannot be laid down as an absolute rule of law that a dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. It is not also correct to lay down as a general proposition that a dying declaration is a weaker kind of evidence than other pieces of evidence. A dying declaration stands on the same footing as any other piece of evidence and has to be judged and tested in the light of surrounding circumstances and with reference to principles governing the weighing of evidence. In order to test the reliability of a dying declaration the Court has to see the circumstances in which the dying declaration has been made, for example, the opportunity of the dying man for observation, whether the capacity of the dying man to remember the facts stated had not been impaired at the time he was making the statement and also if the statement has been made at the earliest opportunity and was not the result of tutoring by interested parties. In order to pass the test of reliability the dying declaration has to be subjected to a very close scrutiny keeping in view the fact that the statement has been made in the absence of the accused who had no opportunity of testing the veracity of the statement by cross-examination. But once the Court has come to the conclusion that the dying declaration is a truthful version as to the circumstances of the death and the identity of the assailants of the victim, there is no question of further corroboration. [See Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay, AIR 1958 SC 22=1958 SCR 552]. It is contended on behalf of the appellant that there are certain infirmities in the two statements of Gangadhar. In the earlier statement made to the police patil there is reference to a quarrel between children. In the latter statement Gangadhar said that there was a quarrel between his cousin brother Gokul Chaudhari and another Gokul Namdeo Patil on account of milk dealings. Three eye-witnesses are mentioned in the statement Gangadhar had made to the police patil. In the later statement Gangadhar had said that there were four eye-witnesses. The name of Shridhar Nathu Chaudhari finds place in the dying declaration made to the Police Sub-Inspector which is not found in the earlier statement. In our opinion the contradictions pointed out by counsel on behalf of the appellant are not very material. On the other hand there is evidence that after Gangadhar was stabbed he became unconscious and after he regained consciousness he immediately gave the statement to the police patil in which he declared that the appellant had stabbed him in the abdomen. The appellant is closely related to Gangadhar and there is no reason why Gangadhar should falsely implicate the appellant of the fatal assault. In these circumstances the High Court was justified in accepting the dying declaration of Gangadhar as genuine and true piece of evidence and basing the conviction of the appellant thereon. It is also urged on behalf of the appellant that the conviction should have been under section 324, Indian Penal Code and not under section 307, Indian Penal Code. In our opinion there is no substance in this argument. The evidence of Dr. Kale, P. W. 16, shows that Gangadhar died as a result of peritonitis following laceration of spleen. There was a healed wound of 1" in length in left hypochondrinac region front side 10 inches below left nipple. There was another healed wound 1 /4" in length above injury No. 1. Both the injuries were antemortem. Below injury No. 1 there was laceration of spleen 1" /4". It is clear from the evidence of Dr. Kale that the stab injury was responsible for the laceration of the spleen and as such was dangerous to life. It is clear therefore, that the offence committed by the appellant was under section 307, Indian Penal Code. For these reasons we hold that the judgment of the High Court of Bombay dated March 20, 1967 in Cri. A. No. 1497 of 1965 is correct and this appeal must be dismissed. Appeal dismissed.;