IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
AFTAB H. SAIKIA AND P.K. MUSAHARY, JJ.
Md. Halim Ali – Appellant
Vs.
State of Assam –Respondent
Decided On: 06.02.2008
Dying Declaration - Criminal Law - Section 448/326, I.P.C., Section 302, I.P.C. - The court discussed the admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration made by the deceased implicating the accused. It emphasized that the dying declaration can be treated as substantial evidence and the conviction and sentence can be based on it, provided it inspires confidence and trustworthiness. The court also highlighted that the dying declaration need not be recorded by a medical or police officer and can be made before close relatives. The corroborative evidence of the witnesses was found to support the dying declaration, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The housewife was attacked in her house while her husband was offering prayer. She succumbed to her injuries, and the accused was convicted under Section 448/326, I.P.C. and Section 302, I.P.C. The appeal was filed against the conviction and sentence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dying declaration made by the deceased was admissible and reliable, and the conviction and sentence based on it were upheld. The appeal was dismissed.
Issues: Admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration, sufficiency of corroborative evidence, and the conviction and sentence based on the dying declaration.
Ratio Decidendi: The dying declaration can be substantial evidence for conviction and sentence if it inspires confidence and trustworthiness, and need not be recorded by a medical or police officer. Corroborative evidence from close relatives can support the dying declaration.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence based on the dying declaration were upheld.
P.K. Musahary, J.
1. The short fact of the case is that the housewife Musstt. Rumija Begum was attacked in her house on 7-10-1999 at around 8 p.m. while her husband was offering prayer in the nearby mosque, by a young man accused-Halim Ali with a dagger inflicting injuries on several parts of her body including neck and hand. She was found lying in a pool of blood and was immediately rushed to Mangaldoi Civil Hospital. As her condition was serious, she was sent to Guwahati Medical College Hospital, who succumbed to her injuries on 9-10-1999 at 1.10 a.m. On the basis of a written Ejahar dated 8-10-1999 lodged by Md. Karim Ali. husband of the deceased, a crime being Sipajhar P.S. Case No. 138/1999 was registered under Section 448/326, I.P.C. Subsequently, offence under Section 302, I.P.C. was added thereto after the death of the injured Rumija Begum. On completion of Investigation charge-sheet was laid against the accused. On committal the trial proceeded in the Court of ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Darrang, Mangaldoi. Charges under Section 448/302, I.P.C. were framed against the accused-Halim Ali who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
2. The prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses but the defence examined none. The learned trial Court by judgment and order dated 29-3-2004 passed in Sessions Case No. 125 (DMFT)/01 convicted the accused under Section 445, I.P.C. for which he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to undergo another period of rigorous imprisonment for three months and also convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. for which he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 3,000/- in default to undergo another period of rigorous imprisonment for six months. Both the sentences should run concurrently. The present appeal is preferred against the aforesaid judgment and order.
3. We have perused the records of the case and the impugned judgment and order and heard Mr. J.M. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the appellant assisted by Mr. B.M. Choudhury and also heard Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional PP, Assam. The basic submission of Mr. Choudhury is that the so called dying declaration, which finds no mention in the FIR was falsely introduced by the prosecution on the basis of the interested and enmical witnesses namely, P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 7, and as such the impugned conviction and sentence are not sustainable under the law.
4. Mr. J.M. Choudhury, learned senior Counsel for the appellant has taken us through the evidence of prosecution witnesses particularly, P.W. 1, P.W. 2, P.W. 6 and P.W. 7.
5. P.W. 1, Karim Ali, husband of the deceased deposed that around 7 p.m. on the date of occurrence, when he was in the mosque to recite "namaz," he was informed by his nephew, Aminul (P.W. 3) and elder brother Ajak Ali that his wife was hacked. He rushed to his house and found his wife lying in an injured condition. He saw injury marks on the neck, belly and hands of his wife with fingers almost severed. When he asked his wife, she told him that Halim, son of Eunus had cut her. His younger brother Gafur (P.W. 7), Fakar Ali and niece Firiza (P.W. 2) took his wife to Mangaldoi Civil Hospital and thereafter shifted to GMC hospital where she died. In cross-examination, P.W. 1 stated that his wife could talk for about 10-15 minutes and after that she became unconscious. Ejahar was written by a petition writer, Aminul at his dictation but he did not get it incorporated in the Ejahar that deceased told him that it was accused-Halim who had hacked her.
6. P.W. 2, Firiza Begum, is the wife of Gafur Ali, brother of Karim Ali. She deposed that around 7 p.m. on the date of occurrence she was cooking rice in the kitchen and her husband was in the mosque. It was raining heavily. On hearing cry of Rumija, she rushed to the bedroom of Rumija and found her in a pool of blood. She found none Rumija could not talk properly because of her
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.