IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, N.K. CHANDRAVANSHI, JJ.
Putka @ Sahil Kumar @ Purendra Kumar S/o Late Nand Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 424 of 2022
Decided On : 15-09-2023
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 313, 374(2), 437-A – Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 436 - Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 32(1) – Murder offence - Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house - Appeal against conviction - Appeal is directed against judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted appellant - Held, Both dying declarations state different facts - First says someone has lodged fire from her back and second says that she has witnessed that incident was done by two accused persons - Admittedly, there is no certificate regarding fit state of mind of victim - Presence of Investigating Officer while recording 2nd dying declaration and delay of seven days in lodging FIR after disclosure in 2nd dying declaration makes prosecution story doubtful - Considering facts relating to recording of dying declarations and after duly testing authenticity on basis of parameters laid down by Supreme Court, Court is of considered opinion that trial Court while convicting appellant for offence under Sections 302 (five times) and 436 of IPC has committed grave legal error as prosecution has failed to prove its beyond reasonable doubt - Conviction and sentence under Sections 302 (five times) and 436 of IPC are hereby set aside - Criminal appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
RAMESH SINHA, J.
1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.01.2022 passed by the 11th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, District Raipur in Sessions Trial No. 143/2019, whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant for offences under Sections 302 (five times) and 436 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.1000/- (five times), total Rs.5000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one year for each default and RI for ten years and fine of Rs.1000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one year.
2. The prosecution case as unfolded during the course of trial is that the FIR of the incident was lodged on the allegations that on 9.3.2019 at about 4 a.m. at Sweeper Colony, Siddharth Chowk, Tikrapara, Raipur, house of Sujit Deep S/o Shambhu Deep catches fire and got completely burnt, sadly the entire family including two infant daughters, mother and wife died due to the incident. Sujit Deep had died on the spot itself and other family members died during their treatment in DKS Hospital, Raipur. FIR of the incident was lodged on the basis of 2nd dying declaration (Ex.P-41) given by deceased Priya Deep on 15.03.2019. She was 98% burnt and subsequently died on 20.03.2019. She stated in her 2nd dying declaration that two boys namely Lohara and Putka were smoking bidi in front of her hut, she saw them at night when she wake up for providing water to her children, she asked them not to do so, otherwise the fire will break out, however in reply they light up her dwelling by throwing a burning match stick on her hut. After disclosure of this fact, the FIR was lodged. As per the case of the prosecution, the incident took place around 3 a.m. during the intervening night of 08/09.03.2019 and soon after the incident, the huge fire broke up in the locality, due to which the locals rushed up towards the ablaze hut of the deceased in which deceased No. 1 Sujeet Deep died on the spot, his mother Savita died on 10.03.2019 at 5.45 a.m. in DKS Hospital, his daughters died at hospital between 7-7.30 a.m. on 09.03.2019. Deceased No. 5 who was the sole witness of the incident subsequently died after giving 2nd dying declaration on 20.03.2009. Deceased No. 1-Sujit Deep died on the spot. Merg intimation was recorded vide Ex.P-2. Inquest was conducted vide Ex.P-4 and postmortem was conducted vide Ex.P-30. Deceased No. 2-Savita died in DKS Hospital on 10.03.2019 at 5.45 a.m. Merg intimation was recorded vide Ex.P-1. Inquest was conducted vide Ex.P-7 and postmortem was conducted vide Ex.P-8. Deceased No. 3-Lakshita Deep died at hospital on 09.03.2009 at 7.30 a.m. MLC information was given vide Ex.P-14. Merg was conducted vide Ex.P-16 and postmortem was conducted vide Ex.P-36. Deceased No. 4-Kabiya Deep died at hospital on 09.03.2019 at 7 a.m. MLC information was given vide Ex.P-15. Merg was conducted vide Ex.P-17 and postmortem was conducted vide Ex.P-35. Deceased No. 5-Smt. Priya Deep died at hospital on 20.03.2019 at 6 a.m. Merg intimation was recorded vide Ex.P-24. MLC information was given vide Ex.P-25. Inquest was conducted vide Ex.P-28 and postmortem was conducted vide Ex.P-31.
3. The police after lodging the FIR has investigated the case and has collected evidence. During the investigation, FSL report from the Electricity Department was obtained. Postmortem reports were taken and the statements of the witnesses were recorded and thereafter the charge-sheet was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate having jurisdiction. The appellant abjured guilt and entered into defence.
4. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 23 witnesses and exhibited 55 documents Exs.P-1 to P-55. Statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied guilt. However, he examined none in his defence.
5. The trial Court after appreciating oral a
Devinder alias Kala Ram and Others vs. State of Haryana
Purshottam Chopra and Another vs. State (Government of NCT of Delhi)
Paparambaka Rosamma and Others vs. State of A.P. (1999) 7 SCC 695
A dying declaration must be trustworthy and corroborated; significant discrepancies in the statement led to acquittal due to reasonable doubt not established by prosecution.
Dying declarations can serve as the sole basis for conviction if deemed credible and made in a fit state of mind, as established in this case.
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.
A dying declaration can only serve as a basis for conviction if it is proven to be reliable and made in a fit mental state; otherwise, it cannot sustain a conviction.
A dying declaration must be supported by evidence of the declarant's mental fitness; absence of such certification undermines its reliability as a basis for conviction.
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.