2010 Supreme(SC) 601

2010 (5) Supreme 673
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. B.S. Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar, JJ.
Dhan Singh — Appellant
versus
State of Haryana — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 488 of 2009
Decided on : 22-07-2010

IMPORTANT POINT
In terms of Section 32 (1) of Indian Evidence Act, the statement made by the person as to the cause of his death or to such circumstances, are admissible.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code,1860-Sections 148,452,323,302-Prosecution of appellant along with co-accused persons for causing death of one person and injuries to two others by assaulting them with iron rods and lathis-Trial Court while convicting co-accused persons under sections 148, 452, 325 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC convicted appellant under sections 148, 452, 323 read with section 149 IPC and section 302 IPC-Appeal-Dismissed by High Court-Appeal- There was no reason for deceased to make a false statement in his dying declaration-Despite the fact that he was seriously injured with a very strong blow on his head by iron rod, he was able to specify role of each accused in occurrence- As per the statement of PW1, wife and daughter of deceased had received injuries, which fully supported the case of prosecution-It was a case where head injury proved to be fatal leading to death of deceased- The injuries suffered by injured persons as per the statement of other witnesses including Investigating Officer, had been received during the course of occurrence and in house of deceased- There was no occasion for deceased to falsely implicate any person,particularly, his brothers and appellant - The injuries suffered by deceased were fully corroborated by statement of PW 1 - No reason or justification before Court, not to believe said witnesses and the medico legal report-Merely, because the members of family of deceased wanted to state incorrectly before Court, it did not give any advantage to the appellant,as prosecution had been able to bring home the guilt of accused with cogent and proper evidence- No merit in the challenge to findings recorded in the impugned judgment- From the collective analysis and examination of the evidence on record, it appeared that appellant had no intention to kill deceased and did not give him a blow with the intention to kill or with knowledge that it was likely to cause death-Conviction of appellant altered from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II of the IPC in facts of case- Appeal disposed off. (Para 9 to 12)

       Dying Declaration-Admissibility-. In terms of Section 32 (1) of Indian Evidence Act, the statement made by the person as to the cause of his death or to such circumstances, are admissible- There is no doubt on facts of the present case that statement of deceased was recorded only after he was declared fit to make the statement by the concerned doctor- The dying declaration was endorsed by none other than closest relation of the deceased person present at relevant time- The FIR itself was registered on the statement of deceased , which was recorded by Head Constable, who was competent to do so at the relevant time-No legal infirmity in admissibility of such statement per se in the facts and circumstances of instant case. (Para 7)

       Facts of the Case :

       Appellant was prosecuted herein in the instant case along with coaccused persons for causing death of one person and injuries to two others by assaulting them with iron rods and lathis. Trial Court while convicting coaccused persons under sections 148, 452, 325 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC convicted appellant under sections 148, 452, 323 read with section 149 IPC and section 302 IPC. Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed by High Court.

       2.Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

       The Court held that there was no reason for deceased to make a false Statement in his dying declaration.Despite the fact that he was seriously injured with a very strong blow on his head by iron rod, he was able to specify role of each accused in occurrence. As per the statement of PW1, wife and daughter of deceased had received injuries, which fully supported the case of prosecution. It was a case where head injury proved to be fatal leading to death of deceased. The injuries suffered by injured persons as per the statement of other witnesses including Investigating Officer, had been received during the course of occurrence and in house of deceased. There was no occasion for deceased to falsely implicate any person,particularly, his brothers and appellant. The injuries suffered by deceased were fully corroborated by statement of PW 1. There was no reason or justification before Court, not to believe said witnesses and the medico legal report.Merely, because the members of family of deceased wanted to state incorrectly before Court, it did not give any advantage to the appellant,as prosecution had been able to bring home the guilt of accused with cogent and proper evidence. No merit found in the challenge to findings recorded in the impugned judgment. From the collective analysis and examination of the evidence on record, it appeared that appellant had no intention to kill deceased and did not give him a blow with the intention to kill or with knowledge that it was likely to cause death.Conviction of appellant was altered from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II of the IPC in facts of case. Appeal was disposed off

       Result : Appeal disposed off.