The reliability and evidentiary value of dying declarations, and the application of settled legal principles in determining their credibility.

JUDGMENT :

(Abhay S. Waghwase, J.) :

1. The instant appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [Cr.P.C.], is directed by the appellant/convict against the judgment and order dated 27.05.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vaijapur in Sessions Case No. 81 of 2014 by which appellant came to be held guilty and so convicted and sentenced for commission the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code [IPC].

FACTS IN BRIEF GIVING RISE TO THE SESSIONS TRIAL

2. Deceased Manisha was married to accused Raju around 9 years prior to the incident. Accused was a driver by occupation. According to prosecution, after a year or two, accused started ill-treating deceased Manisha and beat her after getting drunk. Because of such treatment meted out to her, her father PW1 Tarachand brought both of them to reside at Waluj and thereafter, at his own village i.e. Dhamori and they were put up in a rented premises owned by PW7- Kavita.

3. On 14.04.2014, Manisha suffered burns and was resultantly shifted to hospital. There she gave dying declaration Exhibit 43 recorded by PW10 PSI Vyankatesh Ranvirkar, on the strength of which crime came to be registered. While undergoing treatment, Manisha succumbed to the burn injuries and therefore, crime was converted from Section 307 to Section 302 of IPC. After completing all procedural formalities, accused came to be chargesheeted.

4. Case being exclusively triable by the court of sessions, it came to be assigned to the court of Additional Sessions Judge, who conducted trial and on appreciating the evidence, recorded guilt of the appellant holding that prosecution has proved that death of Manisha was as a result of burns suffered by her on being incinerated by accused husband.

It is the above order of conviction which is now questioned before us.

SUBMISSIONS

On behalf of the appellant :

5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. He pressed into service following grounds for questioning the maintainability, sustainability and legality of the judgment.

i) Two dying declarations are inconsistent, involuntary and hence not worthy of credence.

ii) That, there is no cogent and reliable evidence in support of the accusations of ill-treatment or beating by accused after getting drunk.

iii) There is no evidence to show that accused poured kerosene and set Manisha on fire.

iv) No motive whatsoever has been established by prosecution in spite of examining as many as 10 witnesses.

v) There are no independent witnesses in support of accusations levelled against accused.

On behalf of Respondent State :

6. In answer to above, learned APP pointed out that crime is admittedly registered on the basis of dying declaration given by none other than Manisha. That, in both dying declarations, she has consistently named accused to be responsible for the burns. Parents speak about ill-treatment and beating to her at the hands of accused. Independent witness like Special Executive Magistrate PW3 Ashok Nandagavali, who recorded dying declaration, has stepped in the witness box. As such, there is no infirmity in the dying declarations. Role of accused is squarely spelt out in both the dying declarations and therefore, it is submitted that, no fault can be found whatsoever in the findings and reasons assigned by learned trial Judge while convicting accused. Hence it is submitted that there being no merits in the appeal, it be dismissed.

7. We have minutely re-examined, re-analyzed and re-appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence adduced by prosecution. Admittedly crime is registered on the strength of dying declarations. Resultantly it is imperative for us to first visit the so-called dying declarations which are relied by prosecution for holding accused guilty.

First dying declaration Exhibit 43:

8. PW10 PSI Vyankatesh Ranvirkar in his evidence at Exhibit 46 speaks about visiting Ghati Hospital, approaching doctor, handing over letter Exhibit 47 and on his request, doctor ex