2026 Supreme(SC) 71

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.V. NAGARATHNA, R. MAHADEVAN, JJ.
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Chaman Lal – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 430 of 2018
Decided On : 15-01-2026

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Murder – Where judgment of acquittal is found to be manifestly erroneous, perverse, or founded on a misreading of evidence or incorrect application of law, Supreme Court would be justified to set aside acquittal and record conviction.
(2) Motive assumes significance, primarily in cases based on circumstantial evidence – Where there is direct evidence in form of a credible and trustworthy dying declaration, absence of strong proof of motive is not fatal to prosecution case.
(3) Dying declaration need not be made in expectation of immediate death – Conviction under Section 302 IPC can rest solely on a dying declaration if it is found to be voluntary, truthful and reliable – Corroboration is not a rule of law but one of prudence – Law does not prescribe any rigid form for recording dying declaration.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Murder – Acquittal by High Court – Court is ordinarily slow to interfere with orders of acquittal – However, where High Court has adopted wholly erroneous process of reasoning, misread material evidence, or ignored vital circumstances resulting in a grave miscarriage of injustice, interference is clearly permissible – Where judgment of acquittal is found to be manifestly erroneous, perverse, or founded on a misreading of evidence or incorrect application of law, Supreme Court would be justified to set aside acquittal and record conviction – Conviction can be sustained solely on the basis of a dying declaration even in absence of corroboration, provided it inspires confidence – Dying declaration in present case inspires full confidence – Prior to recording the statement, medical opinion regarding fitness of deceased was duly obtained – Although Medical Officer vacillated on certain aspects, dying declaration cannot be discarded on that ground alone – Declaration clearly and unequivocally attributes act of pouring kerosene oil and igniting fire to respondent – It bears thumb impression of deceased and was recorded in presence of senior officers – There is no material on record suggestive of tutoring, coercion or manipulation – Deceased did not initially name assailant – However, FIR is not expected to be encyclopaedia of entire prosecution case – Such an omission cannot ipso facto discredit subsequent dying declaration recorded in accordance with law. (Paras 13.2, 13.4, 16.3, 17 and 19)

(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Murder – Acquittal by High Court – Deceased died of burn injuries – Alleged conduct of respondent in attempting to extinguish fire and sustaining minor burn injuries does not, by itself, exonerate him from culpability – Such conduct can equally be consistent with attempt to create appearance of innocence after commission of offence – Defence witnesses are either interested or partisan and fail to rebut consistent and cogent prosecution evidence – Motive assumes significance, primarily in cases based on circumstantial evidence – Where there is direct evidence in form of a credible and trustworthy dying declaration, absence of strong proof of motive is not fatal to prosecution case – Evidence on record discloses that respondent subjected deceased to frequent quarrels, humiliation and verbal abuse – Dying declaration itself refers to persistent matrimonial discord and ill-treatment thereby furnishing plausible background for commission of offence – Prosecution is not required to establish motive with mathematical precision and failure to conclusively prove motive does not weaken an otherwise reliable and cogent case – Prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that respondent committed offence punishable under Section 302 IPC – Trial Court correctly relied upon dying declaration and surrounding circumstances to record conviction of respondent – High Court fell into manifest error in reversing well-reasoned judgment of conviction recorded by Trial Court by re-appreciating evidence in a manner contrary to settled principles governing appellate interference – Impugned Judgment of acquittal passed by High Court set aside and Judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Trial Court restored. (Paras 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27)

(C) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32 – Dying declaration – Evidentiary value – Dying declaration need not be made in expectation of immediate death – Conviction under Section 302 IPC can rest solely on a dying declaration if it is found to be voluntary, truthful and reliable – Corroboration is not a rule of law but one of prudence – Law does not prescribe any rigid form for recording dying declaration – So long as Court is satisfied that declaration is voluntary, truthful and reliable, hyper-technical objections cannot form basis for its rejection. (Paras 16 and 18.3)

Facts of the case:

Instant Criminal Appeal has been preferred by State of Himachal Pradesh assailing Final Judgment and Order dated 26.08.2014 passed by High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Criminal Appeal No. 295 of 2010, whereby High Court allowed appeal preferred by respondent and set aside the judgment of conviction dated 16.07.2010 and consequential order of sentence dated 03.08.2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Chamba Division, Chamba, Himachal Pradesh in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 2010, thereby acquitting respondent of charge under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Findings of Court:

The respondent shall surrender forthwith to undergo the remaining sentence, failing which Trial Court shall take appropriate steps in accordance with law

Result : Criminal Appeal allowed.