Back
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ., Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.
Rajkumar Banjare S/o Shankar Banjare - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Chhattisgarh - Respondent
CRA No. 1126 of 2021
Decided On : 15-01-2025
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Appeal against conviction for murder - Appellant convicted for setting wife ablaze due to dowry demands - Evidence included multiple dying declarations, with the third being deemed credible - The court found sufficient evidence to uphold conviction. (Paras 1, 70)
(B) Dying Declaration - Admissibility and reliability - The court emphasized that a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if found credible and voluntary, despite inconsistencies in earlier declarations. (Paras 51, 68)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for murdering his wife Ombai by setting her on fire after a history of domestic violence and dowry demands. Multiple dying declarations were recorded, with the third one being pivotal in establishing guilt. (Paras 1, 70)
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the conviction based on the credible third dying declaration and corroborating evidence, dismissing the appeal. (Paras 70, 71)
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of multiple dying declarations and whether the evidence was sufficient to prove the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 7, 68)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the third dying declaration was credible and corroborated by other evidence, establishing the appellant's guilt for murder. (Paras 68, 70)
Result: Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
Judgment :
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.)
1. Present appeal under Section 374(2) of the CrPC, 1973 is filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.12.2020, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahasamund, in Sessions Case No.33 of 2017, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC , and sentenced R.I. for life with fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for six months.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the deceased- Ombai was married to the appellant since six years back. Out of their wedlock, they were having two children. After some time of the marriage, their relationship started deteriorating, as the appellant used to harass Ombai for demand of money, and asked her to bring money from her parents. The community meeting was convened on various occasions, and on all the occasions, the appellant assured that he would keep his wife in good condition and would not beat her.
On 18.12.2016, the appellant again started beating his wife, and on 19.12.2016, her in-laws had gone to her sister-in-law’s house, and the deceased, along with her husband, were alone in their house. At that time, her husband again started harassing her and beating her, and he poured Kerosene Oil on her body and set her ablaze. When she started shouting, he tried to extinguish the fire with a jute bag. At that time, persons in the vicinity gathered there and took her to the hospital. PW27 Dr Manprit Gurudutta sent an intimation to the Police Station- Mahasamund vide memo Ex.P33. She was being treated at the Government Hospital by PW27, who gave the MLC report Ex.P34, in which he opined that the deceased received 85% 2nd-degree burn injuries. He referred her to the Burn Unit of Medical College Hospital, Raipur, for further treatment. On the same day, on 19.12.2016, after obtaining her fitness certificate, Dying Declaration Ex.P1 was recorded by the Police at about 11.20 am. On the same day, PW16 Dikeshwar Kumar Sahu, Naib Tahsildar also recorded the Dying Declaration of the deceased, marked as Ex.P24, at the District Hospital, Mahasamund, at about 11.25 am. On 23.12.2016, PW-23 Lal Singh, uncle of the deceased, made a complaint to the Police Station-Tumgaon that the in-laws of the deceased may tamper with the evidence collected by the Police during the investigation and may change the statement of the deceased. When the deceased was referred to the Burn Unit of Medical College Hospital, Raipur, another (3rd ) Dying Declaration Ex.P32 was recorded on 24.12.2016 at about 4.05 pm, by one Anubhav Sharma (PW25), Additional Tahsildar, Raipur, at Dr BR Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur.
During the treatment, Ombai died on 05.01.2017 at Dr BR Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur, and her death intimation Ex.P25 was sent by the doctor to the Police Station- Moudhapara, Raipur, where Merg Intimation Ex.P26 was recorded, and Inquest of the dead-body was prepared by the Executive Magistrate vide Ex.P3 in presence of the witnesses. The body was sent for its postmortem, and PW29 Dr GM Nirala conducted the postmortem of the dead body of the deceased and gave his report vide Ex.P28A. After conducting the postmortem, the doctor found 88%, 2nd-3rd degree burn injuries on the dead body of the deceased, and opined that death was due to Cardio-respiratory failure as a result of burn injuries, and their complications. Merg intimation recorded at Moudhapara Police Station was transferred to the jurisdictional Police Station- Tumgaon, District-Mahasamund, where, numbered Merg intimation Ex.P29 was recorded on 22.01.2017.
On 25.12.2016, Dehati Nalishi Ex.P36 was recorded on the instance of deceased-Ombai at the Burn unit of Dr BR Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur, her statement under Section 161 CrPC was also recorded by the Police vide Ex.P37, and FIR Ex.P38 was registered on the same day against the appellant for commission of the offence under Section 307 of the IPC . One half-burnt sari, blouse
A dying declaration can serve as the sole basis for conviction if it is credible, voluntary, and corroborated by other evidence, despite inconsistencies in earlier statements.
The reliability and consistency of dying declarations are crucial in criminal cases, especially when multiple contradictory declarations are present.
Dying declarations can constitute sole evidence for conviction if found voluntary and truthful; the burden of proof for alibi rests solely with the appellant.
Dying declarations must be corroborated by additional evidence to ensure reliability; absence of corroboration raises doubts about their truthfulness.
The admissibility and reliability of dying declarations as a sole basis for conviction, as established by various Supreme Court cases.
Dying declaration – In cases where Court finds that there exist more than one dying declarations, each one of them must be examined with care and caution and only after satisfying itself as to which ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
