Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Aravind Kumar, N.V. Anjaria, JJ.
Narendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 302 of 2014 With Criminal Appeal No. 307 Of 2014 With Criminal Appeal No. 309 Of 2014
Decided On : 30-04-2026
(A) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32[Section 26 of BSA] – Dying declaration – Evidentiary value – Dying declaration is regarded with utmost evidentiary value, because it is believed that a person will not meet the maker with lies in his mouth – However, as a matter of prudence, if there are some suspicious circumstances related to a dying declaration, then in that case, same can be rejected – While conviction can be solely based on a dying declaration, court still has to weigh the same in light of surrounding circumstances and with reference to principles governing evidence tendered by prosecution. (Paras 23 and 25)
(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 498A – Cruelty – Conviction and sentence – Acquittal from charge under Section 302 of IPC – Death caused due to cardio-respiratory failure as a result of ante mortem burn injuries – There are two dying declarations on record – Variation in two dying declarations in the manner she died casts doubt on their veracity, but second declaration is more believable than first one because first one was recorded after deceased was tutored to give statement in a particular manner – Circumstances cannot take place of proof and in a criminal trial, guilt has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt – In a criminal trial, in case there are two inferences possible, then one favouring accused must be followed – No direct evidence was produced by prosecution on record to implicate father-in-law for mental cruelty, or to show that he was somehow directly involved in torturing deceased or raising demand for dowry – Factum of dowry demand does not find presence in any of testimonies of family of deceased – It becomes unsafe for Court to rely on contradictory statements of interested witnesses to visit punishment upon husband or in-laws – Demand of dowry was not proved – Appeal of father-in-law allowed and appeals of husband and mother-in-law dismissed. (Paras 23, 25, 27, 28 and 29)
Facts of the case:
High Court was pleased to set aside conviction of accused persons namely Nagendra Singh (Husband), Narendra Singh (Father-in-Law) and Lila Singh (Mother-in-Law) u/s 302 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) acquitting them of charge u/S. 302 of IPC. However, High Court upheld their conviction u/s 498A of IPC, reduced sentence to period they have already undergone and maintained fine of Rs. 1000/- each as imposed by Additional Sessions Judge.
Findings of Court:
When questioned in cross-examination about reason of this omission, all family members of deceased categorically pinned the blame on the police for non-recording of statement. Further, not a single independent witness could depose anything pertaining to demand of dowry. In such a scenario it becomes unsafe for Court to rely on contradictory statements of interested witnesses to visit punishment upon husband or in-laws.
Result : Criminal Appeals partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
ARAVIND KUMAR, J.
1. Three Criminal Appeals have been filed against the order of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Criminal Appeal No. 1248 of 2002, wherein the High Court was pleased to set aside the conviction of the accused persons namely Nagendra Singh (Husband), Narendra Singh (Father-in-Law) and Lila Singh (Mother-in-Law) u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) acquitting them of the charge u/S. 302 of IPC. However, the High Court upheld their conviction u/s 498A of IPC, reduced the sentence to the period they have already undergone and maintained the fine of Rs. 1000/- each as imposed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge.
2. Criminal Appeal No. 302 / 2014 has been filed by Narendra Singh, the father-in-law of the deceased challenging his conviction u/s 498A IPC. Criminal Appeal No. 309 / 2014 has been filed by Pushp Raj Singh Baghel, the brother of the deceased (defacto complainant) against all three accused persons challenging their acquittal u/s 302 IPC and Criminal Appeal No. 307 / 2014 has been filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh against all three accused persons challenging their acquittal u/s 302 IPC. Hence, all these three criminal appeals are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
3. The case of the prosecution as laid in the charge-sheet is that the deceased woman had tied the matrimonial knot with Nagendra Singh on 12.07.2000. To fulfill the burgeoning demands of dowry, she was subjected to taunts and cruelty by her in-laws. Things took a steep turn for her on 15.04.2001 when she sustained burn injuries in the kitchen, i.e., within nine months of the marriage. As per the prosecution, the husband of the deceased had stuffed cloth in her mouth, poured kerosene oil all over her body and set her on fire and was immediately rushed to the Primary Health Center, Devlond, Madhya Pradesh for treatment. She was examined by PW-6 / Dr. Rajesh Mishra, who reported that 55% of her body was burnt, and it was fatal to her life. There was a smell of Kerosene oil emanating from her clothes.
4. Legal proceedings were put into motion. The next day, i.e., on 16.04.2001, her dying declaration came to be recorded by the Executive Magistrate Shri Prabha Shankar Tripathi wherein the victim stated that her husband, her mother-in-law and her father-in-law used to demand car and on the day of the incident, they stuffed cloth into her mouth and poured kerosene and set her on fire. The same day, the police reached the residence of the respondents, seized a burnt iron bucket, two plastic boxes which smelt of kerosene and other oil, burnt jute bag, matchsticks and burnt pieces of paper. Thereafter they seized the place of occurrence, i.e. the kitchen. Since her condition continued to worsen, on 17.04.2001 she was shifted to Gandhi Medical Hospital, Rewa for treatment. A second dying declaration was recorded by Shri KL Suryavanshi who was the Deputy Superintendent of Police. In the second dying declaration, there was a contradiction and the victim this time stated that since her in-laws used to quarrel with her over insufficiency of dowry, she poured Kerosene on herself and set herself on fire.
5. On 18.04.2001, FIR No. 51 / 2001 was registered u/s 306 / 498A / 34 IPC and S. 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (in short DP Act). She died while being treated in hospital on 22.04.2001. The next day, post-mortem was conducted by PW-17 / Dr. SK Pathak, who stated that death was caused due to cardio-respiratory failure as a result of ante mortem burn injuries on her person. After completion of investigation, chargesheet came to be filed against all the accused persons u/S. 302 / 304 / 498A IPC and S. 3 / 4 of DP Act.
6. Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Beohari (in short Sessions Court) framed charges u/s 498A/304B and in the alternative u/s 302 / 34 IPC against all the accused persons.
7. The prosecution examined 23 witnesses. The accused persons denied the prosecution case and they examined two defence wit
(1) Dying declaration – While conviction can be solely based on a dying declaration, court still has to weigh the same in light of surrounding circumstances and with reference to principles governing....
The court emphasized the necessity of corroborating dying declarations and established that dowry-related cruelty leading to death constitutes an offence under Section 304B IPC.
witnesses of both the sides (prosecution and the defence) sail on the same boat both have to be given same treatment at par to appraise on the touchstone of credibility and truthfulness which has not....
Dowry death – Conviction can be solely recorded on the basis of dying declaration – However, for doing so, court must come to a conclusion that dying declaration is trustworthy, reliable and one whic....
Dying declarations must be consistent for legal value; inconsistent declarations undermine grounds for conviction under dowry death charges.
The Dying Declaration must be credible and corroborated; in this case, it was deemed unreliable due to contradictions and lack of supporting evidence.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove dowry demand for conviction under Section 498-A I.P.C. and the scrutiny of the dying declaration and medical evidence f....
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that a woman was subjected to cruelty for dowry demand to establish a case of dowry death under IPC Section 304-B.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
