Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
R.L. Anand, J.
Manphul - Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 69-SB of 1987.
Decided On : 27 January, 1998
DYING DECLARATION - SOLE BASIS FOR CONVICTION - SECTION 32(1) OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - RELIABILITY, CREDIBILITY, AND TRUSTWORTHINESS OF DYING DECLARATION - CORROBORATION OF DYING DECLARATION - SECTION 304 PART II, INDIAN PENAL CODE - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - CAUSATION OF DEATH - SEPTAEMIA AS DIRECT CONSEQUENCE OF INJURY - KNOWLEDGE OF LIKELIHOOD OF DEATH - OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 302 INDIAN PENAL CODE NOT MADE OUT.
Fact of the Case:
Manphul was convicted under Section 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code, for causing the death of his real brother, Sube Singh, by inflicting an injury with a two-pronged Jaili. The conviction was based solely on the dying declaration of Sube Singh, which was recorded by the police after obtaining a fitness certificate from the doctor. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the dying declaration was not corroborated by medical evidence and that the offence did not fall under Section 302 Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the dying declaration was reliable, credible, and trustworthy, and that it was corroborated by the statement of Baru Ram, the father of the deceased, and the doctor who examined the deceased. The court also held that the offence fell under Section 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code, as the appellant had the knowledge that the injury was likely to cause death, even though the cause of death was septicaemia, which was a direct consequence of the injury.
Issues: 1. Whether a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction? 2. Whether the dying declaration in this case was reliable, credible, and trustworthy? 3. Whether the dying declaration was corroborated by other evidence? 4. Whether the offence fell under Section 302 or Section 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. A dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if it is found to be reliable, credible, and trustworthy. 2. The dying declaration in this case was found to be reliable, credible, and trustworthy as it was made by the deceased to his real brother, who had no motive to implicate the appellant falsely. 3. The dying declaration was corroborated by the statement of Baru Ram, the father of the deceased, and the doctor who examined the deceased. 4. The offence fell under Section 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code, as the appellant had the knowledge that the injury was likely to cause death, even though the cause of death was septicaemia, which was a direct consequence of the injury.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of the appellant were upheld.
R.L. Anand, J. (Oral) - Whether conviction can be based on sole dying declaration if it inspires confidence in the mind of this Court, is the short legal point involved in this appeal filed by Manphul son of Baru Ram, who was convicted under Section 304 Part-II, Indian Penal Code, and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years, allegedly for causing the death of his real brother Sube Singh.
2. According to the prosecution story, Sube Singh deceased had three brothers, including Manphul appellant. Out of them Sube Singh deceased and Manphul appellant were married and the remaining two, i.e. Dharamvir and Subhash, were not yet married at the time of the occurrence, which took place on 31st May, 1986 in the area of village Baroda, falling within the jurisdiction of Police Station Uchana and F.I.R. No. 52 dated 10th June, 1986 was registered. To proceed further with the facts, Sube Singh deceased became separated from his father 4/5 years ago before the occurrence. 8/9 months before the day of occurrence, Manphul appellant also separated from his father. In the family partition, a vacant plot fell to the share of Manphul appellant, while a constructed building fell to the share of Sube Singh. However, Sube Singh permitted Manphul accused to continue living in one Kotha of the share which had fallen to him upto the month of Jeth. On 30th May, 1986 the deceased told his brother Manphul accused to vacate the Kotha. The accused, however, showed his unwillingness. Again on 31st May, 1986 at about 7 P.M. the deceased told the accused in the presence of his father to vacate the Kotha. The accused took affront, went inside the Kotha, brought a two pronged Jaili and gave a thrust on the right side of the navel of Sube Singh. The occurrence was witnessed by Baru, father of the deceased and the accused, who tried to intervene. Manphul accused ran away when he saw Pappal son of Teka, who resides in the neighbourhood of the deceased and the accused.
3. Baru Ram removed the injured to the hospital at Jind, where he was medically examined by Dr. R.P. Taneja (PW1) who found one lacerated would 1/4 cm. x 1/4 cm. on the right side of abdomen, 10 cm. away from the mid-line of abdomen and 8 cm. above the anterior superior aliac spine. The doctor also noticed fresh bleeding. The doctor advised X-ray. The doctor also sought the advice of the Surgeon. Dr. R.P. Taneja (PW 1) also found one reddish contusion, 1/5th cm x 1/5th cm. 3 cm. medial and interior to injury No. 1. According to the opinion of the doctor, both the injuries were caused within six hours of the examination with a blunt and pointed weapon. Ruqa (Ex.PB) was sent on the night intervening 31st May and Ist June, 1986 to S.H.O. Police Station City, Jind, at about 12.40 A.M. Along with the ruqa, he also forwarded a carbon copy of the Medico-legal report prepared by him. First of all D.D.R. No. 25 (Exhibit PL) was entered at 1.30 A.M. at Police Station City, Jind. A.S.I. Ram Kala (P.W.7) went to the General Hospital, Jind, where he made application (Ex.PC) before Dr. Taneja in order to ascertain his opinion whether the injured was fit to make a statement or not. The doctor vide his endorsement (EX.PC/1) declared the injured as unfit to make the statement. Resultantly, A.S.I. Ram Kala returned to the Police Station and recorded D.D.R. No.26 at 2.15 A.M. (Exhibit PB/1). The said A.S.I. during the course of visit to the hospital came to the conclusion that the occurrence had taken place at village Baroda in the jurisdiction of Police Station Uchana. He, therefore, forwarded Medico-legal Report (Exhibit PA), Ruqa (Ex.PB), application (Exhibit PC) and copy of the D.D.R (Ex. PB/1) to Police Station Uchana, regarding the admission of Sube Singh in the hospital in an injured condition, through Constable Hari Kishan. A wireless message was also flashed from Police Station City, Jind, to Police Station Uchana, regarding the admission of Sube Singh injured in the ho
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
