SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Chh) 274

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, CJ., BIBHU DATTA GURU, J. 
Ramesh Chakradhari, S/o. Jayram Chakradhari – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Police of Police Station- Kumhari – Respondent
CRA No. 2320 of 2023
Decided On : 26-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Shikhar Bakhtiyar, Advocate.
For the Respondent/State:Mr. Praveen Das, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer

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.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Section 302 - Murder conviction - Appellant convicted for murdering wife by setting her on fire following a quarrel. Appellant sentenced to life imprisonment with fine. Evidence primarily based on dying declaration, recorded without necessary medical certification of mental fitness. (Paras 1, 2, 41)

(B) Dying Declaration - Admissibility and requirements - A dying declaration must be certified as made in a fit mental state by the attending medical officer to be reliable. Absence of such certification raises grave doubts regarding voluntariness and truthfulness. Appeals court emphasizes the necessity of corroborative evidence and procedural safeguards in recording dying declarations. (Paras 27, 40, 43)

(C) Legal Standards - Conviction based on dying declaration requires strict adherence to legal norms regarding the mental state of the declarant. (Paras 31, 32)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted of murdering his wife by setting her on fire due to alleged suspicions about her fidelity. The evidence largely hinged on the wife's dying declaration.

Issues: Whether the dying declaration was admissible in the absence of medical certification regarding the victim's mental state at the time it was recorded.

Findings of Court:
Prosecution failed to provide corroborative evidence, and the dying declaration lacked essential safeguards, casting doubt on the appellant's conviction. (Paras 40, 41)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that due process was not followed in the recording of the dying declaration, and the absence of medical certification undermined its reliability, rendering the conviction unsafe.

Result: Conviction and sentence set aside; appellant acquitted.

Table of Content
1. conviction for murder conviction background. (Para 1)

Judgment :

Ramesh Sinha, CJ.

1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.10.2023 passed by the the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, District Durg, in Sessions Trial No. 70/2022, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the IPC) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.

2 The appellant/convict was charged under Section 302 of the IPC for murdering his wife Lalita Chakradhari (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) by pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire with a matchstick on 09.01.2022 at 19.00 hours in his own house situated at Ward No. 9, Shivnagar, Kumhari, under Police Station Kumhari, District Durg.

3 The admitted facts in this case is that the deceased is the wife of the appellant. Pooja Chakradhari (PW-1) is the daughter and Roshan Chakradhari (PW-3) is the son of the deceased and the appellant. Appellant is the brother of Rajesh Chakradhari (PW-2). The appellant is the nephew of Sukalya Bai (PW-4) and Harish Chakradhari (PW-6).

4 The case of the prosecution, in brief is that two to three months prior to the incident dated 09.01.2022, the appellant had been abusing and assaulting his wife, i.e. the deceased, due to suspicions about her character, claiming she was having an affair with one Laxminarayan Chakradhari. On 09.01.2022, when the deceased returned home at approximately 7:00 p.m. after buying vegetables from the weekly market in Kumhari, the appellant said that she had gone to market with Laxminarayan and and began assaulting her. At that time, the complainant, Pooja Chakradhari, (PW-1) and her younger brother, Roshan Chakradhari (PW-3), were present at home. Displeased by the abuse, the complainant, Pooja Chakradhari, left the house and went to her grandmother's house next door. At that moment, a loud screaming sound was heard. Pooja Chakradhari (PW-1) saw her mother emerge from the house in a burning condition upon which the neighbours doused the flames. The deceased was then brought to the Community Health Centre, Kumhari, in an Ambulance. The deceased was talking at that time when Pooja Chakradhari asked her mother how it happened, to which the deceased replied that her father i.e. the appellant poured kerosene on her and set her on fire with a matchstick to kill her. On 09.01.2022 itself, the statement of the deceased (Exhibit P/20) was recorded by the police. On 10.01.2022, Pooja Chakradhari (PW-1) lodged a Dehati Nalishi (Exhibit P/1) at DKS Hospital, Raipur. Based on the Dehati Nalishi, an offence under Section 307 of the IPC was registered and investigation was initiated in the case.

5 During the investigation, on 10.01.2022, upon the presentation of the complainant Pooja Chakradhari (PW-1), the deceased’s plain clothes and the burnt clothes were seized as per Exhibit P/4. On the same date, a site map (Exhibit P/2) of the incident was prepared, plain soil, soil smeared with kerosene, match box, and a plastic container with kerosene, were seized from the scene, as per seizure memo (Exhibit P/13). On 10.01.2022 itself, upon the appellant’s instance, the clothes worn at the time of the incident were seized, as per seizure memo (Exhibit P/12). On 10.01.2022, the deceased’s dying declaration (Exhibit P/17) was recorded by the Executive Magistrate at DKS Hospital, in which the deceased stated that her husband, i.e. the appellant had assaulted her, poured kerosene on her, and set her on fire. On the same date, the scene was inspected and a Panchnama (Exhibit P10) was prepared and the appellant was arrested after evidence of incrimination was found against him

6 During treatment, on 16.01.2022, following the deceased’s death, a merg intimation (Exhibit P/18

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top