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

2016 Supreme(SC) 115

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
T.S. THAKUR, CJI., V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.
Gulzari Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 92 of 2016 (Arising Out of SLP (Crl) No.7406 of 2015)
Decided on : 02-02-2016

IMPORTANT POINT
Valid dying declaration may be made without obtaining a certificate of fitness of the declarant by a medical officer.

Headnote:(a) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32 – Valid dying declaration may be made without obtaining a certificate of fitness of the declarant by a medical officer. (Para 21)

       (2002) 6 SCC 710; (1999)2 SCC 126 – Relied upon

       AIR 1962 SC 130; (2011) 13 SCC 125; (2010) 11 SCC 423; (2006) 3 SCC 161 – Referred

       (b) Criminal trial – Conviction – Appellant convicted on basis of reliable evidence and valid dying declaration – No interference warranted. (Para 22, 23)

       Facts of the case:

       The appellant was convicted and sentenced under Sections 302, 323 read with 34 IPC.

       High Court upheld the conviction and the sentence.

       Finding of the Court:

       There is no reason to interfere with the conviction.

       Result: Appeal dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT :

V. Gopala Gowda, J.

Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and order dated 29.05.2012 passed in Crl. Appeal No.367-DB of 2002 by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant upholding the judgment and order of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Hisar in Criminal Case No.37 S.C. whereby the learned Sessions Judge had convicted the appellant under Sections 302, 323 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life, along with a fine of Rs.200/-. The appellant was also directed to pay a fine of Rs.200/- under Section 323 of IPC. In case of default of payment of fine of Rs. 400/-, the appellant was further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.

4. Brief facts of the case are stated hereunder to appreciate the rival legal contentions urged on behalf of the parties:-

5. The prosecution case before the Trial Court was that on 28.05.1999 FIR No. 281 of 1999 was registered at Police Station, Sadar Hisar against Om Prakash, Gulzari and Kuldeep for committing murder of one Maha Singh, and voluntarily causing injuries to Dariya Singh (eldest son of Maha Singh) and that they have committed offences punishable under Sections 302, 323 read with Section 34 of IPC.

6. According to the prosecution, on the intervening night of 26/27.05.1999, Maha Singh was brought to Civil Hospital, Hisar in an injured condition. At 2.15 am, the doctor on casualty duty gave his opinion stating that the injured victim was in a fit condition to make his statement. Head Constable Manphool Singh (PW-7) reached the hospital at 10:00 am and recorded the statement of Maha Singh. Thereafter, the statement of Maha Singh was sent to Police Station at 10.40 am on 27.05.1999 for recording with an endorsement that no cognizable offence has been made out.

7. Subsequently, the condition of Maha Singh started deteriorating and on the night of 27.05.1999 he was referred to PGI Hospital Rohtak. On 28.05.1999, he was transferred to the Government Hospital, Hisar where he was declared by the Hospital as brought dead. On the very same day, intimation was sent to the Police Station and a case was registered under Sections 302 and 323 read with Section 34 of IPC on the basis of the statement of Maha Singh recorded by the Head Constable Manphool Singh (PW-7).

8. The inquest proceeding was conducted and post mortem of the body was done in the Government Hospital. The scaled site plan as well as rough site plan was prepared and the three accused were arrested. On 04.06.1999, ASI Ram Kumar (PW-12) arrested Gulzari Lal (the appellant herein), Kuldeep Singh and Om Prakash (who were co-accused before the Sessions Court). On completion of the investigation by the investigation officer, challan was presented against the appellant and the co-accused before the learned Magistrate.

9. On 18.11.999, charges were framed against the accused persons under the provisions of Sections 302/323 read with Section 34 IPC by the Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Hisar.

10. The prosecution has examined the 14 witnesses at the time of trial and their testimony was recorded before the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The accused persons were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in order to afford them a reasonable opportunity to defend themselves against the evidence on record.

11. On 11.03.2002, the Additional District & Sessions Judge passed the judgment and order by recording the finding that charges against the appellant proved and convicted him along with co-accused Om Prakash and sentenced them for life imprisonment under Sections 302 read with 34 IPC and imposed a fine on each accused of Rs.200/- and further held that accused shall also pay a fine of Rs.200/- under Sections 323 read with 34 IPC. In default of payment of fine of Rs. 400/- the defaulting accused would furth























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