IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.
Arjun Singh Rajput, S/o Baijnath Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer of Police Station - Ajak, Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh - Respondent
CRA No. 114 of 2021
Decided On :
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 307, 436, 449 - Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(2)(v) - Conviction and sentencing of appellant for multiple offenses including life imprisonment for murder - The trial court's reliance on the dying declaration of the deceased was questioned due to lack of corroborative evidence and doubts regarding the declarant's mental fitness at the time of the statement. (Paras 1, 9, 34)
(B) Dying Declaration - Admissibility and reliability - The court emphasized that a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction only if it inspires confidence and is made in a fit mental state, which was not established in this case. (Paras 11, 21, 34)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for setting fire to the house of the deceased, resulting in her death and injuries to others. The prosecution's case relied heavily on the dying declaration of the deceased, which was recorded under questionable circumstances. (Paras 1, 2, 34)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, particularly due to the lack of corroborative evidence to support the dying declaration. (Paras 31, 34)
Issues: The main issues included the reliability of the dying declaration and whether the prosecution proved the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 6, 34)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the conviction based solely on the dying declaration was unsafe due to the absence of corroborative evidence and doubts regarding the declarant's mental state. (Paras 31, 34)
Result: The conviction and sentence of the appellant were set aside, and he was acquitted of all charges. (Paras 34, 36)
Judgment :
(Ramesh Sinha, CJ.)
1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.12.2020 passed by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.42 of 2018, whereby learned Special Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant as follows:-
| Conviction | Sentence | |
| Under Section 449 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 | : | Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 1 month |
| Under Section 436 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 | : | Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 1 month |
| Under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 | : | Life imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 1 month |
| Under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (2 times) | : | Rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 1 month |
| Under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste & Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 | : | Life imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 1 month |
( All the sentences were directed to run concurrently)
2. The prosecution case as unfolded during the course of trial is that the accused set fire to the house of Mona Singh, in which Mona Singh (since deceased), Shankar Kumar Ravi (PW-1) and Lado alias Samriddhi (PW-3) were injured. Mona Singh died during the course of treatment. Merg intimation (Ex.P/16) was registered stating that Mona Singh, wife of Shankar Kumar Ravi, was burnt in fire in her house on 03.05.2018, who was admitted to the hospital by her brother-in-law Besahu (PW-5) and sister Reshma, who died during the course of treatment. In this regard, accidental death was recorded in the register vide Ex.P/15 by the Lady Constable Bholi Rajwade. On the basis of the said death information (Ex.P/14), First Information Report was registered vide Ex.P/18. Crime details from was prepared vide Ex.P/2 and summons under Section 175 of the Cr.P.C. was given to the witnesses vide Ex.P/5. Inquest report was prepared vide Ex.P/6 and Nuksani Panchnama was prepared vide Ex.P/8. The spot map of the place of incident was prepared vide Ex.P/20. In this regard, when the statement of injured Lado alias Samriddhi (PW- 3) was taken, she told that at the time of setting the fire, she was in the house with her sister and brother-in-law and Arjun poured kerosene and set the fire with a matchstick. The statement of injured Shankar Kumar Ravi (PW-1) was also taken, he told about the incident of setting the fire and also told that Lado alias Samriddhi had heard the voice of accused at the time of setting the fire. He further stated that his brother closed the gate and sprinkled kerosene and lit it on fire with a matchstick. They broke the gate and came out. His brother's name is Arjun Singh Rajput, who lives in Agra Sirsaganj. He wants to usurp her property and he had tried to kill her 2-3 times and when she had gone to Agra, he had also fired a bullet at her once. Dying declaration of the deceased Mona Singh was recorded vide Ex.P/9 by Kishore Kumar Verma, Naib Tahsildar (PW-13). After the Panchnama proceedings, dead body of Mona Singh was subjected to postmortem examination, which was conducted by Dr. Mithlesh Minj (PW-23), who opined in the postmortem report (Ex.P/26) that the cause of death seems to be cardio-respiratory failure due to burn complications. Injured Shankar Kumar Ravi (PW-1) and Lado alias Samriddhi (PW-3) were subjected to medically examined by Dr. Rachna Aurthor (PW-14), who found simple burn injuries over their persons and gave reports vide Ex.P/10 and Ex.P/12, respectively. The appellant was arrested on 07.07.2018 at about 01.45 PM by the Police Station Surajpur vide arrest memo Ex.P/24.
3. Statements under Section 161 of the Cr.P
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)
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.
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 must be trustworthy and corroborated; significant discrepancies in the statement led to acquittal due to reasonable doubt not established by prosecution.
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.
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.
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.
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.