SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(SC) 655

2007(4) Supreme 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[From Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench)]
G.P. Mathur & A.K. Mathur, JJ
Dayal Singh—Appellant
versus
State of Maharashtra—Respondent
Appeal(crl.). 244 of 2006
Decided on : 03-05-2007

IMPORTANT POINT
1.If a dying declaration is not elaborate but consists of only a few sentences and is in actual words of maker, the mere fact that it is not in question answer form cannot be ground against its acceptability or reliability.
2.It is not essential that a Dying Declaration should be made only before a magistrate.

Headnote:Indian penal Code, 1860 – Sections 498A,302 – Death by burn injuries - Prosecution of appellant accused for causing death of his wife by setting her on fire by pouring kerosene on her person – Allegation that appellant accused used to ill treat his wife, pressurizing her to bring money from her parents – Conviction on basis of dying declaration – Appeal – Evidence of mother and brother of deceased conclusively established that appellant ill-treated deceased for his demand of bringing money from her parental house not being unfulfilled – Deposition of said prosecution witnesses that deceased had given a statement in hospital that appellant had set her on fire – No reason to doubt authenticity of dying declaration even though deceased was a Sikh lady and dying declaration was in Marathi language – Since having lived in a Marathi speaking area throughout her life and having studied upto 10th class in Marathi medium school, nothing abnormal in deceased giving her statement in Marathi language - No reason to discard dying declaration recorded by PW10 Head Constable in presence of PW9 Doctor – No case of appellant that Dying Declaration was not immediately sent to Court of concerned magistrate or its copy was not given to him in accordance with S. 207 CrPC – No reason to reject testimony of Pw9 & Pw10 due to mere fact that Investigating Officer not recorded their statement u\s 161 CrPC – Charge against appellant fully established from evidence on record – Conviction recorded by court below not warranted interference u\a 136 - Appeal dismissed.(Paras 8,9,14,15,16)

       Evidence Act – Section 32 – Dying declaration recorded by a head constable – Whether Admissible? Held (Yes) – It is not essential that court below not warranted interference u\a 136. Appeal dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT

G. P. MATHUR, J. —

This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 28.1.2005 of Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench), by which the appeal filed by the appellant Dayal Singh was dismissed and his conviction under Section 498-A and 302 IPC and sentence of six months R.I. and imprisonment for life respectively, as recorded by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded, by the judgment and order dated 23.3.1990, were affirmed.

2.The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the deceased Tejinder Kaur, daughter of the complainant PW.1 Chamanbai, was married to the appellant five or six years prior to the incident and she had two daughters, Pritpal and Sharanpal. The appellant started ill-treating Tejinder Kaur right from the beginning and used to pressurize her to bring money from her parents. About four months prior to the incident, which took place on 22.3.1989, the appellant took Tejinder Kaur to her mother’s house, who also resided in Nanded, and after making a demand of Rs.5,000/- he came back alone leaving his wife there. On the next day, he went to the house of his mother-in-law Chamanbai with a naked sword in his hand and asked Tejinder Kuar to accompany him and also bring Rs.5,000/-. The money could not be paid by the mother of the deceased. It is alleged that after Tejinder Kaur came back to her husband’s house, she sent some letters to her mother through a milk vendor complaining about ill-treatment being meted out to her. At about 3.00 p.m. on 22.3.1989, Chamanbai received information that Tejinder Kaur had received burn injuries and she was admitted in the Civil Hospital. She immediately rushed to the hospital and on enquiry Tejinder Kaur disclosed that she was set ablaze by the accused by pouring kerosene on her person. Chamanbai along with her son Sher Singh went to Police Station Wazirabad, where an FIR of the incident was lodged at 6.30 p.m. P.S.I. Murkute visited the house of the appellant at 7.00 p.m. on 22.3.1989 which consisted of only one room and seized half burnt sari, petticoat, woolen blanket, mattresses, quilt, pillow, etc. He found two sunmics cots partially burnt, a stove, a kerosene tin and an empty gas cylinder. He then visited the hospital and instructed Head Constable PW.10 Dattatray Vinkar to record the statement of Tejinder Kaur when she regained consciousness. Tejinder Kaur regained consciousness at about 10.30 p.m., information regarding which was given by her brother PW.4 Sher Singh to Head Constable Dattatray Vinkar. The Head Constable immediately summoned PW.9 Dr. Mohammad Khursheed Ahmad, Duty Medical Officer, who examined the injured and found her conscious. Thereafter, the statement of Tejinder Kaur was recorded by PW.10 where she gave details of the occurrence, namely, demand of dowry by the appellant and how the appellant had set her on fire by pouring kerosene. The statement Ex.31 was recorded by PW.10 and Dr. Khursheed Ahmad made an endorsement thereon that the patient was conscious throughout her statement. At about 00.45 hours on 23.3.1989 Tejinder Kaur succumbed to her injuries. After inquest had been held, the body was sent for post mortem examination, which was carried out by two doctors who found 83% burns thereon. According to the opinion of the doctors, the death was due to the extensive burns which caused hypovolenic and neurogenic shock leading to cardio- respiratory failure. The seized clothes were sent for medical examination and the report thereof indicated presence of kerosene.

3.After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant under Section 498-A and 302 IPC. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. His main defence was that he had never made any demand for money and in fact he had deposited some money in the account of Tejinder Kaur and had also purchased land in her name. He further stated in his statement which was given in writing that T





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top