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

2014 Supreme(Bom) 286

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE & V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

Datta
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Criminal Appeal No. 428 of 2011
Decided on: 06-02-2014

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
For the Appellant:Joydeep Chatterji, Advocate.
For the Respondent: D.R. Kale, A.P.P.

Headnote:EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 - Section 32 - Dying declaration. - In absence of an endorsement that contents of dying declaration read over to and admitted by its declarant, dying declaration is unsafe to rely upon.

       EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 - Section 32 - Dying declaration. - Since declarant is not available for cross-examination hence factum of recording of dying declaration not to be accepted merely because a witness depose about it.

       Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Evidence Act, 1872, Section 32 - Conviction under, based on dying declaration. - Where there was no eye-witness to alleged incident and two dying declarations allegedly made by deceased, itself was doubtful therefore conviction of accused relying on such dying declaration cannot be sustained.

JUDGMENT

(V.M. Deshpande, J.)

Feeling aggrieved by the Judgment and Order of conviction passed by the learned Ad Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Latur dated 25th July, 2011 in Sessions Case No.92 Of 2010, by which the Court below convicted the appellant for the offence punishable U/Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( In short, the I.P.Code) and directed that the appellant should suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- and in default payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, the appellant has approached before this Court.

2. The prosecution case is in very narrow compass and the same is given as under:-

The appellant is a mechanic by profession. Deceased Kavita was his wife. The date of incidence is 10th May, 2010 at 2.00 p.m. Their marriage took place prior to two years of the incident. The couple was residing as a tenant in the house of one Devidas Lahubande, which is situated at Balaji Nagar, Latur. The deceased Kavita suffered 91 % burn injuries. Kavita died on 16th May, 2010 at 2.30 p.m. The cause of death is found in the post mortem report Exh.No. 29 as “septicemia due to 91% superficial to deep burns partly infected”.

The prosecution case further proceeds that, on suffering burn injuries, Kavita was admitted into Civil Hospital, Latur. On her admission, Civil Hospital, Latur reported about her admission to the Police.

On receipt of the information about the admission of Kavita in burnt condition, P.W.No.12 Shahaji Ghadge, Asstt.Sub Inspector went to the burn ward of Civil Hospital, Latur to record the statement of Kavita. He gave requisition to the Doctor and requested to certify, whether Kavita is in a position to give her statement. Upon that, attending Doctor namely Dr. Meghraj Chawada (P.W.No.10) opined that, Kavita was not in a position to give her statement, therefore, permission was not given to P.W.No.12 A.S.I. Shahaji Ghadge to record her statement.

On the next day i.e on 11th May, 2010, P.W.No.12 A.S.I. Shahaji Ghadge again visited the Civil Hospital, Latur and met to Dr.Chawada and enquired about the condition of Kavita, upon which, Dr. Chawada gave permission to P.W.No.12 A.S.I. Shahaji Ghadge to record the statement of Kavita, as she was in a position to give her statement. Accordingly, P.W.No.12 A.S.I. Shahaji Ghadge recorded the statement of Kavita. Said statement is at Exh.No.42, on the record. As per the said statement, Kavita disclosed that, prior to two years back her marriage took place with the appellant. Both resides as a tenant in the house of Lahubande at Balaji-Nagar. Kavita in the morning at 10.00 a.m. demanded money from him to purchase rice however, the appellant did not give stating that he is not having money with him; resulting into quarrel between them. Her statement further discloses that, thereafter, the appellant went for his work and then at 2.00 O'clock when she was cooking, the appellant returned to the house. Thereafter, he made a telephonic call to P.W.5, the maternal uncle of Kavita. That time, maternal uncle of Kavita asked the appellant that when he will come to his house for meal on account of “Dhonde Jevan”(fest for the son-in-law) Upon that, the appellant replied that, his niece Kavita is serving better dhonde(stone) to him and then insulted the maternal uncle by saying that, they are not fit to be a relatives. The statement further discloses that, on account of said fact, quarrel took place between them and the appellant asked the Kavita to leave the house. That time, Kavita replied that she will not leave the house. Upon that, the appellant poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze. Due to which, Kavita, came out of house and one Shivkanya (P.W.No.4) daughter-in-law of landlord Lahubande poured water on her. The admission paper of Kavita are placed on record Exh.No. 36 and in the paper book at page Nos. 106 to 137 show that, she was admitted in the hospital by the appellant.

The prosecution case further proc


























































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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top