2023 Supreme(SC) 793

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. Gavai, J.B. Pardiwala, Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.
Irfan @ Naka – Appellant
Versus
The State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 825-826 of 2022
Decided on : 23-08-2023

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Dying declaration while carrying presumption of being true must be wholly reliable and inspire confidence – Where there is any suspicion over veracity of same or evidence on record shows that dying declaration is not true it will only be considered as a piece of evidence but cannot be basis for conviction alone.
(2) Benefit of doubt must always go in favour of accused – It is unsafe to record conviction on the basis of a dying declaration alone in cases where suspicion is raised as regards correctness of dying declaration.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32(1) – Dying declaration – Juristic theory regarding acceptability of a dying declaration is that such declaration is made in extremity, when the party is at point of death and when every hope of this world is gone, when every motive to falsehood is silenced, and man is induced by most powerful consideration to speak only truth – Notwithstanding the same, great caution must be exercised in considering weight to be given to this species of evidence on account of existence of many circumstances which may affect their truth – Since accused has no power of cross-examination, courts insist that dying declaration should be of such a nature as to inspire full confidence of court in its truthfulness and correctness – Court, however, should always be on guard to see that statement of deceased was not as a result of either tutoring or prompting or a product of imagination. (Para 43)

(B) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32(1) – Dying declaration – Since time immemorial, despite a general consensus of presuming that dying declaration is true, they have not been stricto-sensu accepted, rather general course of action has been that Judge decides whether essentials of a dying declaration are met and if it can be admissible, once done, it is upon duty of court to see extent to which dying declaration is entitled to credit – There is no hard and fast rule for determining when a dying declaration should be accepted – Duty of Court is to decide this question in facts and surrounding circumstances of case and be fully convinced of truthfulness of same – Dying declaration while carrying presumption of being true must be wholly reliable and inspire confidence – Where there is any suspicion over veracity of same or evidence on record shows that dying declaration is not true it will only be considered as a piece of evidence but cannot be basis for conviction alone. (Paras 60, 61, 62, 63 and 64)

(C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302, 436 and 326-A – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 8 – Murder of three persons – Death penalty – Circumstantial evidence – Two dying declarations – Inflammable substance might have been poured on floor of room and thereafter, fire must have been ignited – Once, room is on fire person responsible for setting room on fire would immediately leave that place – Conduct of accused may be unnatural because he was residing in the very same house, however, conduct which may be a relevant fact under Section 8 of Evidence Act, 1872, by itself may not be sufficient to hold a person guilty of offence of murder – Two dying declarations are not consistent or rather contradictory to oral evidence on record – It is duty of prosecution to establish charge against accused beyond reasonable doubt – Benefit of doubt must always go in favour of accused – It is unsafe to record conviction on the basis of a dying declaration alone in cases where suspicion is raised as regards correctness of dying declaration – Prosecution has not proved its case against appellant-convict beyond reasonable doubt – Appellant-convict acquitted of all charges levelled against him. (Paras 46, 47, 63, 64, 68 and 69)

Facts of the case:

Present appeals by special leave are at the instance of a convict-accused and is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.04.2018, passed by High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Capital Case No. 4669 of 2017 connected with Reference No. 11 of 2017 by which, High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the convict-accused and thereby affirmed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence of death passed by Additional Sessions Judge Court No. 6, Bijnore for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 436 and 326-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Findings of Court:

Rule of benefit of reasonable doubt does not imply a frail willow bending to every whiff of hesitancy. Judges are made of sterner stuff and must take a practical view of legitimate inferences flowing from the evidence, circumstantial or direct. Even applying this principle, we have a doubt as regards the complicity of the appellant-convict in crime.

Result : Appeals allowed. Appellant acquitted.