Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : M.N.RAO, MOTILAL B.NAIK
Public Prosecutor, H.C., A.P. - Appellant
Versus
Pothula Narsimha Rao - Respondent
Decided On : 11-30-92
CRIMINAL LAW - SECTION 302 IPC - FACTUAL MATRIX - EYE WITNESSES TURNED HOSTILE - DYING DECLARATION RECORDED BY POLICE OFFICER - EVIDENTIARY VALUE - SECTION 161 CR. P. C. STATEMENT - RELIABILITY - COURT ANALYSIS - NO RELIABLE EVIDENCE - ACQUITTAL UPHELD.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased was stabbed by the accused during a quarrel. The deceased succumbed to his injuries in the hospital. The eye witnesses turned hostile and the Investigating Officer did not give evidence. The prosecution relied on the dying declaration recorded by the Head Constable and the 161 Cr. P. C. statement recorded by the Sub-Inspector of Police.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the dying declaration recorded by the Head Constable and the 161 Cr. P. C. statement recorded by the Sub-Inspector of Police were not reliable as there was enough time to have recourse to more reliable methods of recording a dying declaration. The court also held that there was no evidence that the accused was the person who was referred to as the assailant by the deceased in the statements.
Issues: 1. Whether the dying declaration recorded by the Head Constable and the 161 Cr. P. C. statement recorded by the Sub-Inspector of Police were reliable? 2. Whether there was evidence that the accused was the person who was referred to as the assailant by the deceased in the statements?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the dying declaration recorded by the Head Constable and the 161 Cr. P. C. statement recorded by the Sub-Inspector of Police were not reliable as there was enough time to have recourse to more reliable methods of recording a dying declaration. The court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Dalip Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1979 SC 1173, which held that the practice of the Investigating Officer himself recording a dying declaration during the course of investigation ought not to be encouraged. 2. The court held that there was no evidence that the accused was the person who was referred to as the assailant by the deceased in the statements. The witnesses, who turned hostile, deposed that they did not know who A2 was and according to them two youngsters picked up quarrel with PW 4, the bus driver.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the accused.
( 1 ) THIS appeal by the State, represented by the Public Prosecutor, is directed against the judgment of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur in Sessions Case No. 109 of 1991 acquitting the sole respondent herein (A-7) of the charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Originally, two persons were prosecuted for the offence in question but by the time the case came up for trial, A1 died and so A2 alone was tried and acquitted.
( 2 ) THE prosecution case as placed before the trial Court, in brief, was as follows :- On the night of 15-4-1990 at about 8. 00 p. m. , the deceased Kunchala Kama Rao, who was an employee of the A. P. State Road Transport Corporation, Chilakaluripet Depot, along with PWs. 2 and 3 (also employees of Chilakaluripet Depot) and some others went to the house of one Subha Rao, another employee, in connection with the marriage of the latter s sister and all of them had dinner at Subba Rao s house. When they were returning at about 9. 45 p. m. at the cross-road of Chilakaluripet, they saw A1 and A2 quarrelling with PW 4, who was driving the R. T. C. bus bearing registration No. AP9/722232 plying from Macherla to Madras. The accused questioned PW 4 why he honked horn at the centre. The deceased Kunchala Rama Rao interfered and questioned the accused as to why they were unnecessarily quarrelling with PW 4. Thereupon, A 1 took out a knife from his pant pocket and stabbed the deceased on his right abdomen. A2 also took out a knife from his pant pocket and stabbed the deceased on his left abdomen below the chest, as a result of which the deceased fell down bleeding profusely. PWs 2 and 3 and others took the injured to Chilakaluripet Town Police Station in a rickshaw. At the police station, H. C. 397 (PW 7) recorded the statement of the injured - Ex. P6 - and registered the same as Crime No. 129 of 1990 under Section 307 IPC and issued First Information Report, Ex. P7, at about 10. 30 p. m. on 15-4-1990. PW 7 also sent the injured to the Government Hospital, Chilakaluripet, but having come to know that the Medical Officer was on leave, the injured was taken to the private nursing home of one Dr. Grandhi Rama Rao (PW 6 ). The Sub-Inspector of Police, Chilakaluripet, PW 15, went to the nursing home of PW 6 and recorded the statement of the injured; the statement is Ex. P 12. He also recorded the statements of PWs 1 to 3 and another Sivaiah. After first-aid was given to the injured, he was removed in a jeep with police escort to the Government General Hospital, Guntur and admitted in the Casualty Ward by PW 8, the duty doctor, at about 12. 45 p. m. on the intervening night of 15/16-4-1990. While undergoing treatment at the hospital, the injured succumbed to the injuries on 17-4-1990 at about 10. 30 a. m. After receiving the death intimation, the Section in the FIR was altered from 307 IPC to 302 IPC. The Inspector of Police, Chilakaluripet Circle held inquest over the dead body of the deceased at the mortuary of the Government General Hospital, Guntur on 18-4-1990 from 8. 00 a. m. to 10. 30 a. m. ; Ex. P9 is the inquest report. PW 5, Assistant Professor of Forensic Medicine, Guntur Medical College, conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued Ex. P5, post-mortem certificate. PW 5 found four external and two internal injuries on the body of the deceased and the opinion of PW 5 was that external injuries 1 and 2 associated with internal injuries were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The accused were arrested by the Inspector of Police on 18-4-1990 at about 5 p. m. in the presence of PW 11 and others. Pursuant to the confessional statement of A. 1. M. O. 1, button knife was recovered and seized by the Inspector of Police. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was laid.
( 3 ) AS already stated supra, by the date of trial, A1 died and so the charge against him abated. All the eve witnesses, PWs. 1 to 4 turned hostile. The Investigat
AI
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
