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

2005 Supreme(Bom) 1463

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
RIYAAS BEGUM
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Decided On : (October 18, 2005) 2006

Headnote:Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 32 - Dying declaration - Reliability - Dying declaration recorded by doctor while admitting the decrement/patient in hospital - Mere non-recording of each and every overt act by itself cannot be made a ground to assail its veracity or genuineness of the same. - Where the dying declaration given by the deceased to Doctor was reduced to writing immediately after she was brought to hospital and she stated therein that her mother-in-law, brother-in-law and husband poured kerosene and set her on fire, it was contended by defence that dying declaration was vague and omnibus in nature as no specific overt acts against the accused were mentioned in the same.

       Held, that the non-recording of the details in the medical admission register does not detract from the fact that it was inculpatory of all the accused. The recording of the history when the patient was brought to the hospital was not part of the police investigation. At that stage, the doctor is more concerned with facilitating early treatment rather than the medico-legal aspects of the case. A doctor does not necessarily have to be an expert on the recording of the dying declarations. Suffice to say that if the gist of what he has recorded inculpates the accused, the mere non-recording of each and every overt act by itself cannot be made a ground to assail the veracity or genuineness of the same.

       

Judgment

R. S. MOHITE, J.

( 1 ) BY this appeal the appellants Riyasbegum w/o. Mohd. Ismail (hereinafter referred to as "accused No. 1") and Mohd. Altamas s/o mohd. Ismail (hereinafter referred to as "accused No. 3") impugn a judgment and order dated 7-6-2000 passed by the Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, in Sessions case No. 257 of 1999. By the impugned judgment and order, while acquitting original accused No. 2 Mohd. Imran s/o Mohd. Ismail of all the charges, the present appellants i. e. original accused Nos. 1 and 3 were held guilty of the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal code and were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of one month.

( 2 ) THE brief facts of the prosecution case were as follows : (a) Accused No. 2 Mohd. Imran Mohd. Ismail was a resident of Azim colony in Aurangabad city. He had earlier married three women by name rahiyabegum, Nafisabegum and PW 4 Rakshandabegum. He had divorced all these three wives. Insofar as his third wife PW 4 Rakshandabegum was concerned, he used to beat her and demand money. Rakshandabegum had once brought Rs. 50,000/- from her parents and paid the said amount to original accused No. 2 Mohd. Imran. Notwithstanding this fact he continued to harass her for money and in November, 1998 he had asked her to bring Rs. 25,000/- failing which he had threatened to kill her. Rakshanda fearing for her life had fled to malegaon. Accused No. 2 had two children from his third wife PW 4 rakshandabegum by name Arman (PW 5) and Faizal. When Rakshanda had fled to Malegaon she had taken her children with her. However, in January, 1999, when the children were playing accused No. 2 kidnapped them and according to rakshandabegum, she had filed a case in Malegaon Court seeking custody of her children. On the date of the incident which occurred on 20-5-1999 the two children of Rakshanda were still residing in the house of original accused No. 2 mohd. Imran. (b) Deceased Sairabegum, the fourth wife of accused No. 2 was married to him about four months prior to the incident. After her marriage, she went to reside at her husbands house. She found out that three accused in this case used to raise quarrels with her over petty matters. She had reported about the quarrelsome attitude of the accused persons to her mother Saherabegum (PW7 ). (c) Four days prior to the incident i. e. on 16-5-1999 deceased Saira had been to her parental house for a family function. The accused persons had also come there and left on the same day. On 20-5-1999 PW 7 Saherabegum came to leave her daughter at her husbands house. At that time, all the three accused quarrelled with PW 7 Saherabegum and asked her as to why she had brought saira back. They suggested that she should have kept Saira in her own house. After being insulted in such a manner PW 7 Saherabegum left Saira at her husbands house and returned back to her home which was situated at Silk Mill colony at Aurangabad. (d) On 20-5-1999 at about 11. 30 p. m. an incident occurred in the house of original accused No. 2 Mohd. Imran in which deceased Saira suffered 95% burns. The burnt body of Saira was carried by her husband accused No. 2 Imran and her mother-in-law Riyazbegum to Ghati hospital in Aurangabad city. The record indicates that the burnt body of Saira reached the hospital at 1 pm. on 21- 5-1999. At the time of admission Saira herself gave the history of her homicidal burns in the following words : "my mother-in-law, brother-in-law and husband poured kerosene and set me on fire. I was asleep and awoke when kerosene was put on me. " it is the prosecution case that this history was recorded by PW 9 Dr. Nivrutti Limbabrao Wanole. After recording her history, Saira was transferred to the burns ward at about 1. 45 p. m. under the care of PW 12 Dr. Anil Degaonkar. While the process of admitting Saira to Ghati hospital was on and after















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
whatsapp-icon Back to top