IMPORTANT POINT
Dying declaration should be such which inspires full confidence of the court of its correctness. The court has to be on guard that such statement of deceased was not as a result of either tutoring, prompting or product of imagination.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code,1860-Section 302 – Death of dceased in matrimonial home by burn injuries – Prosecution of mother in law of deceased for causing her death by pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire – Conviction by Trial Court- Appeal – Dismissed – Appeal – Three dying declarations were recorded of deceased – In first two dying declarations deceased deposed that she caught fire by herself while cooking food on stove – However in third dying declaration deceased deposed that her mother in law set her on fire – Critical examination of the first two dying declarations showed that deceased had stated that after cooking meals in evening she was trying to extinguish the stove, but it got inflamed and her nylon saree caught fire – No one had put her to fire and no one should be blamed for it- Perusal of the same showed that these two statements were consistent and had been made by her, before being tutored by anyone- No doubt, it is true that Third dying declaration Exh. P-18 was in question – answer form but perusal of original record clearly showed that it had many over – writings and some dates had been scored out to put new dates-This itself created a doubt in mind with regard to correctness and veracity thereof- Third dying declaration Exh. P–18 could not be treated as wholly trustworthy as it was shrouded by many doubts – On the other hand, evidence on record showed that Exh. D-3 and P-3 were more reliable and credible – Going by the same fully established that the deceased had not implicated in the same anyone much less the appellant – Impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by Sessions Judge and confirmed in appeal by High Court held unsustainable and liable to be quashed – Appeal allowed. (Paras 19 to 36)
       Facts of the Case :
        The solitary question that arose for consideration in this appeal was whether any one of the three dying declarations of deceased inspired confidence, to sustain conviction of appellant her mother-in-law for commission of offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C and sentence of life imprisonment.
       Findings of the Court :
        Three dying declarations were recorded of deceased . In first two dying declarations deceased deposed that she caught fire by herself while cooking food on stove . However in third dying declaration deceased deposed that her mother in law set her on fire . Critical examination of the first two dying declarations showed that deceased had stated that after cooking meals in evening she was trying to extinguish the stove, but it got inflamed and her nylon saree caught fire. No one had put her to fire and no one should be blamed for it. Perusal of the same showed that these two statements were consistent and had been made by her, before being tutored by anyone.No doubt, it is true that Third dying declaration Exh. P-18 was in question - answer form but perusal of original record clearly showed that it had many over writings and some dates had been scored out to put new dates.This itself created a doubt in mind with regard to correctness and veracity thereof. Third dying declaration Exh. P-18 could not be treated as wholly trustworthy as it was shrouded by many doubts. On the other hand, evidence on record showed that Exh. D-3 and P-3 were more reliable and credible. Going by the same fully established that the deceased had not implicated in the same anyone much less the appellant.Impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by Sessions Judge and confirmed in appeal by High Court held unsustainable and liable to be quashed.

JUDGMENT

Deepak Verma, J.—

1. The solitary question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether any one of the three dying declarations of deceased Sarla, inspires confidence, to sustain conviction of appellant Sharda, her mother-in-law for commission of offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C and sentence of life imprisonment.

2. Appellant has been found guilty of commission of offence under Section 302 of the IPC and has been awarded life imprisonment by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dungarpur. On D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1071/2003 being filed by her in the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur,Crl.A.No. 699/08 the same has been dismissed vide order dated 25.7.2007. Thus Judgment of conviction and sentence awarded by the Trial court has been affirmed. Hence, this appeal after grant of leave to the appellant.

3. Thumb-nail sketch of the facts of the case is as mentioned herein below:- Vinod Vyas was married to Sarla on 21.1.1991, almost 8 years prior to the date of occurrence, which had taken place on 16.8.1999 at the matrimonial home of the deceased.

4. According to the prosecution story, for past two- three years, relations between deceased Sarla, her husband-Vinod and appellant-Sharda were strained. They used to demand dowry from her which she was not able to accede to. On 16.8.1999, deceased Sarla was alleged to have been set on fire by her mother-in-law while she was cooking food on a kerosene stove as a result of which she had sustained 90% burn injuries. She was immediately rushed to General Hospital, Sagwara.

5. On getting the aforementioned information on 16.8.1999, P.W-22 Kishore Singh posted as ASI at the Police Station Sagwara rushed to the General Hospital. Crl.A.No. 699/08 He reached there at about 9 O’clock at night. In the presence of PW-31 Dr. Gokul Prajapati, her first statement Exh. D-3 was recorded.

6. As per this first statement, Sarla disclosed that while cooking meals for the family, she pumped in air in the kerosene stove, which got inflamed thereby pallu of her saree caught fire. Thus she sustained burn injuries on her person. She further stated that no one had deliberately or intentionally put her on fire. Exh. D.3 is her first statement recorded at the hospital, in presence of P.W-31 Dr. Gokul Prajapati, who had put his signatures on the same along with P.W- 22 Kishore Singh. Thumb impression of deceased was also taken on it.

7. P.W-20 -Ranjit Singh was posted as S.I at the Police Station, Varda on the date of incident i.e. 16.8.1999. On receiving the information that Sarla has sustained burn injuries in her matrimonial home, he went to the hospital where Sarla was admitted. However, before going to the hospital, he contacted SDM in his house, so that he could also be taken there for the purpose of recording her statement but was informed Crl.A.No. 699/08 by SDM that he was not well, thus would not be in a position to go with him.

8. P.W-20 Ranjit Singh, after reaching hospital recorded another statement of deceased Sarla on the said date marked as Exh P-3. In the said statement, she reiterated that she had sustained burn injuries, while she was trying to extinguish burning stove, after cooking meals, which got inflamed and her Saree caught fire. Exh. P-3 bears signatures of Dr. Ravindra Mehta (not examined by prosecution), P.W-2 Ganesh Lal and P.W-20 Ranjit Singh besides the thumb impression of deceased Sarla. This was her second statement in point of time recorded in the Hospital.

9. Since the condition of Sarla had deteriorated, she was referred to Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad. She was accordingly taken there for better treatment. However, she died at Ahmedabad on 19.08.1999.

10. P.W-3 Purushottam, cousin of the deceased had submitted an application on 19.8.1999, on behalf of her grand-father PW-2 Ganeshlal to the Dy. Superintendent of Police, Sagwara stating that on the night of Monday, 16.8.1999 Sarla had been set on fire by her husband Crl.A.No. 699/08 V

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2009 Supreme(SC) 1842

2009(8) Supreme 201SUPREME COURT OF INDIAAftab Alam and Deepak Verma, JJ. Sharda — AppellantversusState of Rajasthan — RespondentCriminal Appeal No. 699 of 2008Decided on : 15-12-2009

IMPORTANT POINT Dying declaration should be such which inspires full confidence of the court of its correctness. The court has to be on guard that such statement of deceased was not as a result of either tutoring, prompting or product of imagination.

Cases Referred (1)

2009(8) Supreme 201
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Aftab Alam and Deepak Verma, JJ.
Sharda — Appellant
versus
State of Rajasthan — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 699 of 2008
Decided on : 15-12-2009

IMPORTANT POINT
Dying declaration should be such which inspires full confidence of the court of its correctness. The court has to be on guard that such statement of deceased was not as a result of either tutoring, prompting or product of imagination.