Back
2026 Supreme(Mad) 966
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
N. ANAND VENKATESH, K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ.
Raman – Appellant
Versus
The State through The Inspector of Police – Respondent
Crl. A. (MD)Nos.501 and 824 of 2024
Decided On : 04-06-2026
For the Appellant : Mr.Ayyanar Premkumar
For the Respondent: Mr.T.Leninkumar Counsel for State
A reliable dying declaration can sustain a conviction without corroboration. Homicidal acts committed in the heat of passion, without premeditation, constitute culpable homicide not amounting to murder, warranting sentencing commensurate with the intent and circumstances of the crime.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 294(b), 302, 304(II), 323, 307 - Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 - Section 4 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 161, 313(i)(b), 374(2), 207, 209 - Dying declaration as sole evidence - Realiability and corroboration - Exception I to Section 300 IPC - Culpable homicide not amounting to murder versus murder - Sentencing mitigating factors. (Paras 1, 19, 21, 23)
(B) Evidence - Dying declaration - When reliable, a dying declaration can form the sole basis for conviction without the need for additional corroboration. (Para 18)
(C) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide - An act committed in the spur of the moment without premeditation, during a heat of passion, falls under the category of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, punishable under Section 304(II) IPC. (Para 23)
Facts of the case:
The deceased suffered fatal burn injuries following an altercation with her spouse. A dying declaration was recorded by a judicial magistrate, identifying the spouse and in-laws as responsible for the incident. Following the death of the deceased approximately 21 days later, charges were upgraded to murder. The trial court convicted the accused persons for offences including murder. Appeals were filed against the conviction.
Findings of Court:
The court determined the dying declaration provided by the deceased was reliable and conclusive. However, the evidence against the mother-in-law was found to be insufficient, entitling her to the benefit of doubt. Regarding the spouse, the court held that the absence of premeditation and the presence of sudden provocation during the fight rendered the act culpable homicide not amounting to murder rather than murder. A mitigating factor was the responsibility for the children.
Issues: Whether the dying declaration could be relied upon as the sole basis for conviction, and whether the act of the accused constituted murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Ratio Decidendi: When a dying declaration is consistent and corroborated by medical evidence of the victim's fit state of mind, it suffices for conviction. Acts committed in the heat of passion without prior intent fall under the exceptions to murder, necessitating a modification of charge to culpable homicide under Section 304(II) IPC.
Result: Appeal allowed in part; one appellant acquitted, the other's conviction modified to Section 304(II) IPC with a reduced sentence.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background and procedural history leading to conviction. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 2. abatement of appeal upon death of accused. (Para 16 , 24) |
| 3. evidentiary value and reliability of the dying declaration. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 22) |
| 4. application of exception i to section 300 ipc. (Para 23) |
| 5. final modification of sentencing and acquittal orders. (Para 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT :
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
These criminal appeals have been filed by A1 to A3 against the judgment of the Mahila Court (FTC), Theni, made in SC No.105/2019 dated 30.04.2024, wherein, the appellants were convicted and sentenced in the following manner:
The above sentences were ordered run concurrently.
2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 is the husband of the deceased and A2 and A3 are the in-laws. A1 got married to the deceased nine years prior to the incident and out of the wedlock, they had two daughters and one son. A1 was a drunkard and he always suspected his wife and used to physically subject her to cruelty. A2 and A3 also insulted the deceased. On 04.12.2018 at about 5.00 p.m., the deceased was sitting in front of the house and A1 in a drunken state scolded her stating that 'to whom you are talking and who is the person with whom she is talking'. After abusing in filthy language, A1 is said to have beaten her and caught hold of the tuft of hair and pulled the deceased inside the house. At that point of time, A2 and A3 also instigated A1 and they also abused the deceased in filthy language. A1 is said to have brought the stove and poured kerosene from that stove on the deceased and set her ablaze. The deceased sustained burn injuries and she was rushed to the Theni Government Medical College and Hospital and admitted as inpatient. The Medical Officer of the hospital made a requisition to the Judicial Magistrate, Andipatti (Ex.P8) stating that the deceased has sustained 50%burn injuries and the dying declaration must be recorded.
3. PW12, who was the Judicial Magistrate, received the information on 04.12.2018 at about 11.15 p.m and the Magistrate went to the Government Hospital at about 11.40 p.m. The learned Judicial Magistrate ascertaining as to whether the deceased was in conscious state of mind to give the dying declaration and gave a certificate to that effect (Ex.P7). The dying declaration was recorded from 11.55 p.m. to 12.15 midnight. In the dying declaration, the deceased had explained the manner in which the incident had taken place and the involvement of the accused persons.
4. The Sub Inspector of Police, Jeyamangalam Police Station, Theni received the information from the Government Hospital and hence reached the Government Hospital and recorded the statement of the deceased at 22.30 hrs., and registered the FIR in Crime No.219/2018 at 6.30 a.m., on 05.12.2018 for offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 307 IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 .
5. The investigation was taken over by PW13 and he went to the scene of crime on 05.12.2018 at about 7.45 am. and prepared the observation mahazar (Ex.P9) and rough sketch (Ex.P10) in the presence of witnesses. Under Athatchi (Ex.P11), MO1, which is the kerosene stove was seized.
6. PW13 went to the Government Hospital and recorded the statement of the deceased. On the same day, at about 15.30 hrs., A1 was arrested and he was produced before the concerned Court and was remanded to judicial custody. He also recorded the statements of some of the witnesses under Section 161(3) of Cr.P.C.
7. PW15 took over the investigation since PW13 went on leave and he received the information from the hospital that the deceased died on 24.12.2018 and he prepared the alteration report (Ex.P13) and altered the offence to Section 302 IPC. PW15 conducted the inquest in the presence of the panchayatdars on 25.12.2018 at 8.00 a.m. and prepared the inquest report (Ex.P12). The dead body was sent for postmortem and the
