HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.
Sudhir Mahana, Son of Dharnidhar Mahana - Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1558 of 2019
Decided On : 31-01-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 304-B and 34 - Criminal appeal against conviction for dowry death - Accused-appellants convicted for causing death of the deceased by setting her ablaze due to dowry demand - Dying declaration recorded by Executive Magistrate deemed credible and admissible - Prosecution established guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 1, 22)
(B) Dying Declaration - Principles governing admissibility - Must be voluntary, made in fit state of mind, and trustworthy - Can be sole basis for conviction if credible. (Paras 12, 21)
Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for the murder of Pooja, the wife of appellant No.1, who died from burn injuries inflicted due to dowry demands. The dying declaration recorded shortly before her death implicated the appellants.
Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the trial court's conviction based on the credible dying declaration and other evidence establishing the appellants' guilt.
Issues: Whether the appellants were authors of the crime and if the dying declaration was reliable.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the dying declaration was credible, as it was made in a fit state of mind and corroborated by medical evidence.
Result: Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
Judgment :
(Ramesh Sinha, CJ.)
(1) In this criminal appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., the accused-appellants are calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.10.2019, passed in Sessions Case No.123 of 2018 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Sudhir Mahana & 02 others), by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, District Raigarh (C.G.), whereby they all have been convicted for offence under Section 304-B read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.
(2) Before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to mention here that during the pendency of this appeal, appellant No.02- Dharnidhar Mahana has died and, accordingly, his name has been deleted as per Court order dated 07.01.2025. As such, this appeal stands abated against the appellant No.02 and remained sub judice in respect of the appellants No.01 & 03. Therefore, we consider this appeal only in respect of appellants No.01 & 03.
(3) The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 13.09.2018, between 10:00 to 11:00 AM, in the house of the appellant No.1, situated near Jagannath Temple, which comes within the ambit of Police Station Pusour, District Raigarh (CG), the accused-appellants herein firstly shared common intention with each other to commit murder of Pooja (wife of the appellant No.01 and daughter-in-law of the appellant No.03) for or in connection with demand of dowry and, in furtherance thereof, poured kerosene oil over the body of Pooja (hereinafter referred to as the “deceased”) and set her ablaze, due to which, she suffered burn injuries to the extent of 83% and died during the course of her treatment in the hospital within seven years of her marriage, on 17.09.2018 and, thereby, the appellants are said to have committed offences under Sections 304-B /34 of IPC .
(4) It is further case of the prosecution that immediately after the incident, on 13.09.2018 at about 02:00 PM, the deceased was first escorted to Community Health Centre, Pusour wherein she was medically examined by Dr. Rajni Nayak (PW-17) and, as per her MLC report (Ex.P/12), though she suffered 83% burn injuries, but she was stated to be in conscious state of mind. Thereafter, the deceased was referred to District Hospital, Raigarh for better treatment. During the course of treatment at Raigarh, on 13.09.2018 itself, between 02:50 PM to 03:15 PM, after having been certified by the doctor to be in fit state of mind to give statement vide Ex.P/18, the dying declaration (Ex.P/19) of the deceased was recorded by Executive Magistrate, namely, Leeladhar Chandra (PW-13), wherein she clearly deposed the names of the present appellants to be the authors of the crime by stating that on the date and time of the offence, the accused- appellants herein, with regard to dispute relating to demand of dowry, poured kerosene oil over her body and set her ablaze, due to which, she suffered burn injuries. On the basis of aforesaid information, zero FIR (Ex.P/04) and numbered FIR (Ex.P/03) were registered against the appellants and wheels of investigation started running, in which, spot map was prepared vide Ex.P/05.
(5) However, during the course of treatment, the deceased succumbed to the injuries and died on 17.09.2018, pursuant to which, information with regard to sudden and unnatural death was sent by the hospital to the police. Thereafter, merg intimation (Ex.P/01 & Ex.P/02) were recorded. Summons under Section 175 of CrPC were sent vide Ex.P/15 and inquest proceedings were also conducted vide Ex.P/16. The dead-body of the deceased was sent for postmortem examination and, in the postmortem report (Ex.P/14), conducted by Dr. Naveen Agrawal (PW-16), it has been opined that cause of death of the deceased is syncope as a result of hypovolemia due to burn. Thereafter, the accused-appellants were arrested vide Ex.P/20 & Ex.P/22 respectively. Certain articles were seized from the spot and sent for chemical analy
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra
Devinder alias Kala Ram and others v. State of Haryana
Purshottam Chopra and another v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi)
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.
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.
A dying declaration must be trustworthy and corroborated; significant discrepancies in the statement led to acquittal due to reasonable doubt not established by prosecution.
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.
The court upheld the convictions based on the reliability of the dying declaration and corroborative evidence, affirming the principles governing the admissibility of such declarations.
The dying declaration of the deceased, supported by medical evidence and circumstantial evidence, can be sufficient to establish guilt under Section 302 of IPC.
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.
Court emphasized that a magistrate's dying declaration carries significant weight over oral declarations, affecting conviction in murder cases.
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.