IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, RAVINDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL, JJ.
Revati Bai Kashyap W/o Goutam Kashyap – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 1921 of 2023
Decided on : 03-01-2024
Criminal Appeal - Conviction under Section 302 of IPC - Cr.P.C. 1973 - [SUMMARY OF ACT SECTIONS REFERRED: Section 302 of IPC, Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C.] - The court analyzed the evidence and found the appellant guilty of murdering her husband by pouring kerosene on him and setting him on fire. The dying declaration of the deceased and the medical evidence supported the prosecution's case, leading to the conviction under Section 302 of IPC. The court affirmed the trial court's finding and dismissed the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 302 of IPC for setting her husband on fire, leading to his death. The deceased had sustained burn injuries and made a dying declaration accusing the appellant of pouring kerosene on him. The prosecution presented evidence including witness statements, dying declaration, and medical reports.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 302 of IPC based on the dying declaration of the deceased, medical evidence, and circumstantial evidence. The court affirmed the trial court's finding and dismissed the appeal.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant was guilty of the offence under Section 302 of IPC for causing the death of her husband by setting him on fire.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the dying declaration of the deceased, medical evidence, and circumstantial evidence to establish the guilt of the appellant under Section 302 of IPC.
Final Decision: The court affirmed the trial court's finding and dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of IPC.
JUDGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, J.
1. This criminal appeal is preferred under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, the Cr.P.C.) against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, in Sessions Trial No. 32/2020 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.08.2020, the appellant and her husband i.e. Goutam Kashyap (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) were present in the house and the appellant was busy in talking on mobile phone. The deceased tried to prevent her from talking on mobile phone on which a dispute arose. The appellant is alleged to have poured kerosene on the deceased and set him on fire. The deceased cried for help upon which the appellant poured water on him and fled from the place of incident.
3. Initially, a Dehatinalishi (Exhibit P/35) was recorded by the Police Assistance Centre, District Hospital, Dhamtari bearing Crime No. 0/2020 on 3.08.2020 at about 17:00 hours on the information given by the deceased himself. Thereafter, the First Information Report (for short, the FIR) (Exhibit P/28 and P/29) was lodged on 24.08.2020 at about 11:00 hours against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC. Subsequently, during the course of treatment, the deceased died at District Hospital, Dhamtari on 27.08.2020, and on an intimation given by Ward Boy namely Tiger Sahu of District Hospital, Dhamtari, an unnumbered merg was registered by the Police Assistance Centre, Dhamtari, bearing No. 0/177/20 (Exhibit P/37) on the basis of which a numbered merg being 32/2020 (Exhibit P/32) was registered by the Police of Police Station, Nagri, District Dhamtari. As the deceased succumbed to the burn injuries at District Hospital, Dhamtari during the course of treatment, an offence under Section 302 of the IPC was added and after completion of the investigation, the police filed its charge sheet bearing No. 59/2020 on 07.11.2020 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagri, District Dhamtari for the offences under Section 302 and 307 of the IPC and the case was registered as Criminal Case No. 108/2020. However, the said case was committed to the Court of Sessions, Dhamtari, vide order dated 18.11.2020.
4. Accordingly, Sessions Trial No. 32/2020 was registered and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhamtari, framed charges on 19.01.2021 against the appellant/convict under Section 302 of the IPC. The convict/appellant abjured the guilt and prayed for trial.
5. Amongst others, the prosecution has exhibited the following documents in support of its case:
Property Seizure Memo (Exhibit P/2 and P/3) Arrest/Court Surrender Memo (Exhibit P/4)
Notice under Section 160 of Cr.P.C. (Exhibit P/5)
Spot Map (Exhibit P/6)
Summons under Section 175 Cr.P.C. (Exhibit P/7)
Dead Body Supurdnama (Exhibit P/8)
Notice Under Section 160 Cr.P.C. (Exhibit P/9)
Property Seizure Memo (Exhibit P/10)
Statement of Uttam Kumar Kashyap (Exhibit P/11)
Statement of Deepak Gonadane (Exhibit P/12)
Notice Under Section 160 of Cr.P.C. (Exhibit P/13)
Statement of Ramgopal Sahu (Exhibit P/14)
Notice Under Section 160 of Cr.P.C. (Exhibit P/15)
Statement of Gulab Sahu (Exhibit P/16)
Statement of Neera Bai Kashyap (Exhibit P/17)
Dying Declaration (Exhibit P/18)
Statement of Kekayi Som U/s.164 Cr.P.C. (Exhibit P/19)
Statement of Neera Bai U/s. 164 Cr.P.C. (Exhibit P/20)
Police Intimation (Exhibit P/21)
Application for Medical Examination of deceased Gautam Kashyap (Exhibit P/22)
Indoor Ticket (Exhibit P/23)
Memo for examination of seized articles and report (Exhibit P/24)
Patient Referee Ticket (Exhibit P/25)
Notice un
Atbir vs. Government of NCT of Delhi
Bijoy Das vs. State of West Bengal
Balbir Singh & Anr. Vs. State of Punjab
Laxman v. State of Maharashtra
Muthu Kutty & Anr. Vs. State By Inspector of Police, T.N.
Munnu Raja and Another vs. The State of M.P
Panneerselvam vs. State of T.N.
Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar
Paras Yadav and Ors. vs. State of Bihar
The dying declaration of the deceased, supported by medical evidence and circumstantial evidence, can be sufficient to establish guilt under Section 302 of IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence, including the dying declaration, medical evidence, and witness statements, to establish the guilt of the a....
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.
A dying declaration must be certified by a medical professional regarding the declarant's mental fitness; failure to do so undermines its reliability as evidence in a murder conviction.
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.
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.