IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL, JJ.
Sumitra Bandhe, W/o. Fagwa Ram Bandhe and 2 Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, through District Magistrate, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.292 of 2014
Decided On : 06-02-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 34, 498A, 302, 307 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 313, 161, 374 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32 – Documentary Evidence on Record – Attempt to Murder – Power to examine the accused – Criminal appeal preferred by appellants directed against impugned judgment passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge while acquitting accused trial Court has convicted present accused appellants for offences them to undergo imprisonment for life – Held, Court hereby hold that dying declaration totally unnecessary and uncalled for in light of decision of Supreme Court –Court unable to sustain conviction of appellants conviction is not well merited – Conviction and sentences imposed upon the appellants are liable to be set-aside appellants are acquitted charges in jail – Court direct that they be set at liberty forthwith if not required to be detained under any other process of law – Appeal is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
[Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.]
1. This criminal appeal preferred by the appellants herein namely Sumitra Bandhe (A-2), Dilip Bandhe (A-3) & Mamta Bandhe (A-4) under Section 374(2) of the CrPC is directed against the impugned judgment dated 27-1-2014 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, in Sessions Trial No.186/2012, by which while acquitting accused Faguwaram (A-1), the trial Court has convicted the present accused / appellants – A-2, A-3 & A-4 for offences under Sections 302 read with Section 34 & 498A of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life & pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default, to further undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for one year and rigorous imprisonment for three years & fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default, additional rigorous imprisonment for six months, respectively. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. Case of the prosecution, in short, is that marriage of deceased Ramabai was solemnized with appellant No.2 herein Dilip Bandhe (A-3) on 16-5-2005 and out of their wedlock, they were blessed with a boy child, who was 3 years old on the date of offence. It is the further case of the prosecution that the three appellants herein one acquitted accused used to quarrel with deceased Ramabai stating that she is not fit for their family and she does not work at home. It is also the case of the prosecution that on 19-7-2012 at about 10:00 p.m., husband of the deceased – Dilip Bandhe (A-3) came to the house in inebriated condition and started abusing the deceased and thereafter, he tried to strangulate her and thereafter, he poured kerosene oil over the body of the deceased and thereafter, mother-in-law of the deceased – Sumitra Bandhe (A-2) & sister-in-law of the deceased – Mamta Bandhe (A-4) set her ablaze by a matchstick and thereafter, she was rescued by her brother-in-law and another sister-in-law and subsequently, she was admitted to District Hospital, Durg and thereafter, she was readmitted to Sector- 9 Hospital, Bhilai where during the course of treatment, she succumbed to the injuries sustained by her and died on 25-7-2012. On 20-7-2012, when the deceased was admitted to District Hospital, Durg by her husband, Bhagwati Prasad (PW-3) – owner of the vehicle, Tilakram (PW-4) – neighbour & Naresh Kumar (PW-6) – neighbour, at that time, mother of the deceased – Gayatri Bai (PW- 1) & father of the deceased – Gendlal (PW-7) visited District Hospital, Durg. On 21-7-2012, the deceased was again admitted to Sector-9 Hospital, Bhilai where she gave the medical history to Dr. Uday Kumar (PW-14) that she sustained burn injuries accidentally while cooking on a kerosene oil stove at about 11:00 p.m. on 19-7- 2012 which was recorded in Ex.P-22 proved by Dr. Uday Kumar (PW-14). Thereafter, on 23-7-2012, written report was made by Gendlal (PW-7) – father of the deceased, to the police vide Ex.P-12 alleging cruel treatment on the part of the accused / appellants and pouring kerosene oil on the body of the deceased and setting her ablaze by which she suffered injuries. Thereafter, on 24-7-2012, dying declaration (Ex.P-17) was recorded by Executive Magistrate B.K. Verma (PW-9) at Sector-9 Hospital wherein the deceased implicated all the accused persons i.e. the three appellants herein (A-2 to A-4) and one acquitted accused (A-1) that they poured kerosene oil on her body and set her ablaze. Thereafter, dehati nalishi Ex.P-15 was recorded by Yoddha Prasad Deshmukh (PW-8) – Head Constable, on the instance of the deceased wherein it was informed that on the date of incident, husband of the deceased (A- 3) poured kerosene oil over the body of the deceased and motherin- law (A-2) & sister-in-law (A-4) set her ablaze by matchstick. Statement of the deceased under Section 161 of the CrPC was recorded by Yoddha Prasad Deshmukh (PW-8) vide Ex.P-32 wherein the deceased has impli
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra
Devinder alias Kala Ram and others v. State of Haryana
Laxman v. State of Maharashtra
The reliability and consistency of dying declarations are crucial in criminal cases, especially when multiple contradictory declarations are present.
The admissibility and reliability of dying declarations as a sole basis for conviction, as established by various Supreme Court cases.
The court affirmed that a dying declaration can serve as the sole basis for conviction if it is credible, voluntary, and made in a fit state of mind.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.