Dying declarations can be relied upon for conviction if consistent and free from blemishes, even in the absence of further corroborative evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Apurba Sinha Ray, J.

1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 31.07.2017 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-I, Sealdah, South 24 Parganas in Sessions Trial No. 1(1)2014 arising out of Sessions Case No. 5(7) of 2013 under Sections 302/34 of I.P.C on the grounds, inter alia, that the Learned Trial Judge did not consider the evidences of the prosecution witnesses in its proper perspective and/or has failed to take into account the evidence of the vital witnesses before convicting the appellant under Sections 302/34 of I.P.C.

2. The learned counsel Mr. Mitter has submitted that conviction of the appellant was pronounced only on the basis of a dying declaration of the deceased. In fact that is the only evidence in support of the prosecution case. However, there are certain essential rules to accept a dying declaration as a coherent statement of the victim. First, whether such a dying declaration was made voluntarily. Secondly, the declarant was conscious and mentally alert to give a coherent dying declaration. The declarant must be aware that he is about to die. Moreover, the statement must be consistent with other evidence in the case. The statement must not have been made through tutoring or prompting. Mr. Mitter has also submitted that in cases of multiple dying declarations, the court should see that they are consistent with each other. A dying declaration gains more weight when it is recorded before a Magistrate.

3. According to Mr. Mitter, in the case in hand, the deceased evidently lacked physical and mental competence to give a coherent statement since he suffered 98% burn injury all over his body. There is no certificate from the doctor that the deceased was mentally alert. There was no application made by the I.O. to the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Sealdah or before the Superintendent of NRS Medical College for recording the dying declaration.

4. It is also submitted by the learned counsel that the relevant dying declaration of the deceased is not corroborated by substantial evidence of any other prosecution witness. Even the wife and son of the deceased did not support the prosecution case. According to them, the deceased was a habitual drunkard and was unconscious during the relevant time. Therefore, it is unbelievable that the deceased can give a coherent dying declaration. It is also pointed out by Mr. Mitter that the earliest declaration does not name any assailant though the appellant was known as the landlord. In the last declaration, allegedly recorded by the police officer, all the names of assailants were transpired. It is a trite law that in case of multiple dying declarations, all must be consistent to one another. In this case all the declarations allegedly made at different times were contradictory. PWs 14, 15 the two police constables who were on patrolling duty reached the place of occurrence at the earliest and arranged for shifting the patient to the hospital. Curiously enough they had not spoken a single line about any dying declaration given by the deceased. At 10:48pm, the doctor noted in the hospital records that he had been inflicted burn injury by pouring inflammable oil by "some persons". At 11pm the victim incriminated Appellant and others when the police recorded it. Prior to the incident there is no evidence whatsoever that any witn