The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for corroboration and certification by medical officers for a dying declaration to be considered as substantive evidence for conviction.

JUDGMENT

The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, 3rd Court Medinipur on 26.08.1987 in Session Trial Case No. (v) of January 1986 arising out GR Case No. 744 of 1983 thereby convicting the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence punishable u/s 148 of IPC and also to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years for his offence punishable u/s 304 part 2/149 of IPC; both sentences are ordered to run concurrently.

In a nutshell the prosecution case is that the land owners of village Dherchhara were having some problem over procurement of local agricultural labours as this labours were instigated by the local CPI(M) followers not to serve at the prevailing rate of Rs. 5.00 per day. At this the land owners stopped engaging the local labours and started cultivating themselves or by way of appointing outside labours. This enraged the CPI(M) followers to protest against this and decided to loot the paddy cultivated by those land owners. On 20.11.1983 the CPI(M) followers took out a very big procession in that area and the processionists were armed with bow and arrow e.t.c. The processionsits came to the field to loot away the paddy grown by the land owners and kept stocked in the field after cutting the same. As the land owners including Kartik Patra protested against such of act thus the procesionsit they started shooting arrows from their bows; and arrow shoot by the appellant hit on the chest of Kartik Patra and another by arrow short by another processionists namely Khagen Patra hit on the leg of Baren Poyra. Both of them were removed to the hospital. Baren Poyra somehow saved but Kartik Patra was succumbed to his injury on 30.11.1983. Both the injured made statement before the doctor and the statement of Kartik Patra was recorded by the attending physician as dying declaration. The written complaint was filed by one Ajodhya Patra on the basis of which the case was started by the police. After completion of investigation police submitted charge sheet and all the 15 accused persons were charged u/s 148,304/149 and 304(i)/149 of IPC.

During the trial 13 witnesses were produced by the prosecution to prove the case amongst them most of the witnesses turned hostile. The dying declaration of Kartik Patra was marked as exhibit- 3.

Learned sessions Judge, after hearing arguments and after perusing the materials on record acquitted all the accused persons from the case except the appellant. Learned Sessions Judge, is of view that the conviction is only based on dying declaration of deceased Kartik Patra. Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted before this court that the order of conviction passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, against the present appellant is not at all based on the facts and circumstances of this case.

He further argued that the dying declaration of Kartik Patra which was marked as Exhibit 3, has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. he further argued that the dying declaration cannot be the sole ground for conviction in this case while no witness uttered a single word against the present appellant. He further argued that the prosecution has measurably failed to proof the case beyond reasonable doubt for which all the 14 accused persons were acquitted from this case. Learned Sessions Judge, has mislead and misappreciated the facts and circumstances of this case and he passed the order of conviction only on the basis of dying declaration which is not permissible in the eye of law. He further argued that the dying declaration was not coupled with a certificate of the attending doctor; so, the dying declaration has no value in the eye of law. He further argued that the dying declaration in this case was recorded by the doctor who was deposed as PW 7 the doctor admitted that he did not endorse any certificate regarding the mental condition of the patient before recording the dying declaration.

Learned Advocate for the appellant further a