The reliability and relevance of dying declarations, the presumption under Section 113(A) of the Indian Evidence Act, and the need for corroboration in the presence of inconsistencies.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the Mahila Court at Chengalpet in S.C.No.195 of 2009 vide judgment dated 22.08.2014.)

1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order passed by the Mahila Court at Chengalpattu in S.C.No.195 of 2009, dated 22.08.2014, convicting and sentencing the appellant in the following manner:

The sentences were directed to run concurrently.

 2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 married the deceased Revathi in the year 2008 and was residing with her at Chrompet, Chennai. A2 and A3 are the father and mother of A1. The further case of the prosecution is that A1 to A3 had demanded dowry from the deceased and she was subjected to cruelty and as a result, on 03.06.2008 at about 10 a.m., the deceased Revathi committed self immolation. She was immediately rushed to the Kilpauk Government Medical College and Hospital by PW2. PW6, who was the Doctor gave treatment to the deceased and found that the deceased had suffered 90% burns. The entries made by PW6 in the Accident Register was marked as Ex.P3. Al was also treated by PW6 for the burn injuries sustained by him in his hands and the entries made in the Accident Register was marked as Ex.P4.

 3. PW6 thereafter, had sent information to PW8, who was the Sub Inspector of Police at Chrompet Police Station at about 11 a.m. He came over to the Government Hospital and recorded the statement of the deceased which was marked as Ex.P6. While recording the statement, PW8 gave a certificate to the effect that the deceased was conscious to give such a statement and the same was marked as Ex.P7.

4. PW8 thereafter, gave intimation to the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore for recording the dying declaration. Accordingly, the learned Magistrate, who was examined as PW4 got the necessary certificate from PW5 to the effect that the deceased was in conscious state to give the dying declaration. Thereafter, PW4 proceeded to record the dyeing declaration and it was read over to the deceased and her left hand thumb impression was also obtained in the dying declaration. The same was marked as Ex.P2 and the statement given by the deceased is extracted hereunder:

 5. PW12, who was the Inspector of Police on receipt of the statement recorded by PW8 from the deceased, registered an FIR in Crime No.256 of 2008 under Section 174(3) of Cr.P.C., and the FIR was marked as Ex.P12. In the meantime, the deceased succumbed to the burn injuries on 03.06.2008 at about 4.30 p.m.

 6. The investigation was taken over by PW13 and he went to the house of the deceased on 03.06.2008 at about 8 p.m. and prepared the Observation Mahazar Ex.P13 and Rough Sketch Ex.P14. He also recorded the statement of the witnesses and Doctors under Section 161 (3) of Cr.P.C. The matter was referred to the Revenue Divisional Officer, since the death had taken place under suspicious circumstances and the Revenue Divisional Officer conducted an inquiry. He did the inquest on the dead body of the deceased and the same was marked as Ex.P8. He also recorded the statements of the witnesses which was marked as Ex.P9 series. He ultimately, gave his report which was marked as Ex.P10 and he opined in the said report that the deceased had died only due to demand for dowry and the cruelty that was meted against her. The above documents were collected by PW13 in the course of his investigation and the statement of the Revenue Divisional Officer was also recorded.

7. PW13 thereafter prepared an Alteration Report, which was marked as Ex.P16 and the offence was altered to 306, 498(A) and 304(B) of IPC. The accused persons were arrested on 05.06.2008 at about 7.0