Reliability of dying declaration required a full appellate hearing; summary dismissal was improper in a murder conviction challenge.

A murder conviction based mainly on a dying declaration required a regular appellate hearing because the declaration's reliability was itself a substantial arguable issue, including whether the deceased's injuries permitted such a statement. In serious criminal matters, an appellant should not be denied at least one full merits hearing except on substantial grounds. The High Court's summary dismissal wrongly prevented that consideration, so the appeal was held fit for admission and remitted for hearing and disposal according to law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal against conviction ought to have been heard on merits, particularly in view of the challenge to the reliability of the dying declaration and the summary dismissal by the High Court.

Analysis: The conviction for murder rested mainly on the alleged dying declaration. The reliability of that declaration was itself a substantial and arguable issue, including the question whether the injuries sustained by the deceased would have permitted such a declaration to be made. In serious criminal matters, the opportunity of at least one regular appellate hearing should not be denied except on substantial grounds. Summary dismissal deprived the appellant of that consideration.

Conclusion: The appeal should have been entertained and decided after a regular hearing. The matter was remitted to the High Court for admission, hearing and disposal according to law.

---