HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, C.J., BIBHU DATTA GURU, J.
Sitaram Ravi, S/o. Jeetan Ravi - Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station, Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) – Respondent
CRA No. 499 of 2025
Decided On : 07-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding sunita's injuries and death. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. appellant's arguments against evidence and conviction. (Para 10 , 11 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. court's observation on evidence and prosecution's case. (Para 12 , 13 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. legal principles governing dying declarations. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 5. final judgment acquitting the appellant. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 52 , 56) |
JUDGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, C.J.
1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.11.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.89/2019, whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant for offence under Sections 498A of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for 02 years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month and under Sections 302 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for three months.
2. The prosecution story in brief is that a report was lodged by Smt. Savita (PW-3) at the police post Manipur, Police Station Ambikapur that her daughter Sunita was married to Sitaram in the year 2007. Since the marriage, Sitaram used to quarrel and beat his wife Sunita saying that he would not give anything in dowry. On 02.05.2019, his son-in-law Sitaram returned home after attending a marriage ceremony in village Jabar and beat his wife Sunita over dowry issue and poured kerosene on her and set her on fire with the intention of killing her. When Sunita somehow ran out of the house to extinguish the fire, her elder brother-in-law Krishna Ravi and his wife Shanti, who live in the neighborhood, heard the noise and admitted her to Balrampur Hospital for treatment, where Sunita's condition did not improve and she was admitted to the District Hospital Ambikapur.
3. On the report of Smt. Savita (PW-3) at Manipur Police Outpost, Head Constable Anil Singh (PW-7) at Ambikapur Police Station, crime under Sections 498K and 307 of the Indian Penal Code was registered on zero by the police, the FIR registered on zero is Ex.P-34. When the diary of the crime without number was brought to the Balrampur police station for registering the crime on number, Sub-Inspector of Balrampur Police Station Sampat Potai (PW 21) registered the First Information Report (Ex.P-37) for the crime under Sections 498K and 307 of the Indian Penal Code in Crime No. 112/2019.
4. Inspector Umesh Baghel (PW-14) prepared the map of the incident site (Ex.P-26) and gave written complaint (Ex.P-18) to Tehsildar Balrampur regarding preparation of Patwari map of the incident site. Assistant Sub-Inspector Nirmala Kashyap (PW-17) sent written complaint (Ex.P-33) to Executive Magistrate Ambikapur regarding appointment of Magistrate to record the dying statement of Sunita Ravi. Deputy Tehsildar Kishore Kumar Verma (PW-20) recorded Sunita's dying statement (Ex.P-36). Dr. V.C. Paikara (PW-16) advised to admit Sunita in Burn Ward due to her burns, OPD slip Exhibit is P-32.
5. After Sunita's treatment in Ambikapur, she was discharged on 28/05/2019 and her treatment continued at home and she died on 10/07/2019. On receiving the information of Sunita's death, an unnumbered FIR (Ex.P-29) was registered at Chalgali Police Station. On receipt of FIR No. 08/19 for numbering from Chalgali Police Station by Sub-Inspector Shantilal Kujur (PW-13), he registered FIR No. 34/2019 at Balrampur Police Station, which is Ex.P-15.
6. After Inspector Pradyuman Tiwari (PW-15) gave the written complaint (Ex.P-30) to the Executive Magistrate for the proceedings of the body panchanama, the Tehsildar Shabad Khan (PW-19) issued a notice (Ex.P-4) to the witnesses for the map panchayatnama and the map panchayatnama of the deceased (Ex.P-7) was prepared in front of the witnesses.
7. After the post-mortem examination of the dead
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 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.
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.
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.
The dying declaration of the deceased, supported by medical evidence and circumstantial evidence, can be sufficient to establish guilt under Section 302 of IPC.
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.