Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JJ.
Mithlesh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1213 of 2020
Decided on : 08-12-2022
Conviction - Homicide - Section 302 I.P.C. - [LAND DISPUTE] - [Section 302 I.P.C.] - The court analyzed the evidence and found the accused guilty of setting ablaze the deceased, resulting in his death. The dying declaration, supported by medical evidence, was deemed reliable and admissible. The court relied on the dying declaration as the sole basis for conviction, as it was found to be true, voluntary, and reliable. The court also considered the medical evidence and concluded that the death was a homicidal death. The court held that the accused had no intention to cause the death of the deceased, leading to the conclusion that the offense fell under Section 304 Part-I of the Indian Penal Code. The conviction under Section 302 I.P.C. was converted to Section 304 Part I I.P.C. The accused's sentence was reduced to 10 years with remission, and the fine was reduced to Rs.10,000.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. for setting ablaze the deceased, resulting in his death. The prosecution's case was supported by oral and documentary evidence, including a dying declaration and medical reports. The appellant claimed false implication due to a land dispute.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty based on reliable and admissible evidence, including the dying declaration and medical reports. The court concluded that the death was a homicidal death and that the appellant had no intention to cause the death of the deceased. The conviction under Section 302 I.P.C. was converted to Section 304 Part I I.P.C. The appellant's sentence was reduced to 10 years with remission, and the fine was reduced to Rs.10,000.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant was guilty of the offense under Section 302 I.P.C. for causing the death of the deceased by setting him ablaze.
Ratio Decidendi: The dying declaration, supported by medical evidence, was found to be true, voluntary, and reliable, and was relied upon as the sole basis for conviction. The court concluded that the death was a homicidal death and that the appellant had no intention to cause the death of the deceased, leading to the conversion of the conviction under Section 302 I.P.C. to Section 304 Part I I.P.C.
Final Decision: The appellant's conviction under Section 302 I.P.C. was converted to Section 304 Part I I.P.C. The appellant's sentence was reduced to 10 years with remission, and the fine was reduced to Rs.10,000.
JUDGMENT :
Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J
1. The Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Saharanpur recorded conviction of the present appellant Mithlesh under Section 302 I.P.C. in Sessions Trial No. 520 of 2015 (State Vs. Mithlesh) arising out of Case Crime No. 38/2015, P.S.-Titro, District-Saharanpur and sentenced her for life imprisonment and fine to a tune of Rs.20,000/-and to undergo 6 months additional simple imprisonment in case of default of payment of fine, hence this appeal.
2. The prosecution case as culled out from the FIR is that the informant and the accused had some land dispute. On 9.4.2015 Devendra, son of informant cut down some trees from that land and a complaint was made by the accused in the police station. When the Devendra aforesaid was going to the police station, accused Smt. Mithlesh who was standing outside the police station, with intention to kill, set ablaze Devendra by pouring petrol over him. The occurrence was witnessed by the informant, his son Ravindra and Ranpal son of Mehar Chand. Injured was taken for treatment and written report Ex.Ka-1 was given to the police station on the basis of which chick FIR Ex.Ka-2 under Section 307 I.P.C. was lodged and entry was made in the relevant G.D. Ex.Ka-3. The injured was referred to District Hospital, Saharanpur and subsequently to the higher centre. He was admitted in Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi on 10.04.2015 where during treatment he succumbed to the injuries on 14.4.2015. At District Hospital Saharanpur injured Devendra was medically examined by Dr. Pravin Kumar, who found superficial deep burn over the body except both elbow, waist and scalp. It was found by the doctor that the injuries might have been caused by setting ablaze with aid of petrol or kerosene oil and Medico Legal Report Ex.Ka-11 was prepared. When the injured was brought to Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi, he was medically examined by Dr. Akshat Vahan, who found 85% burn injuries over his body and he was admitted into I.C.U and Medico Legal Report Ex.Ka-5 was prepared.
3. After the death of the deceased the case was converted into Section 302 I.P.C. and his autopsy was performed by Dr. Mukesh Kumar Bansal who found as herein under:
Infected epidermal to dermal thermal burn injuries present all over the body except lower part of abdomen, back of right forearm and right hand, both palms, both sole. Skin Peeled off at places revealing yellowish green foul smelling pus covering necrotic base. Blackening of skin present at places. Singeing of hair present at places. Total area of burn is approximately 85% of total body surface area”.
4. It was opined by doctor that death was due to septicaemic shock as a result of infected ante mortem flame thermal burn injuries involving about 85% of total body surface area and accordingly, autopsy report Ex.Ka-12 was prepared. The Investigation of the case was conducted firstly by Sri Viresh Pal Giri, who recorded the statement of witnesses and after inspection of the spot site plan Ex.Ka-9 was also prepared by him and semi burn clothing, plain soil and stony part of road was also seized and memo Ex.Ka-10 was prepared. The I.O. also recorded statement of injured Devendra, whose fitness to give statement was certified by Dr. Sarseej Sharma through fitness certificate Ex.Ka-4. However, after alteration of the case under Section 302 I.P.C. investigation was taken by S.H.O. Kapil Gautam, who performed the rest proceedings of the investigation and after finding sufficient evidence charge sheet under Section 302 I.P.C. Ex.Ka-8 was submitted to the Court. However, on 14.04.2015 the dying declaration of aforesaid Devendra was recorded by Shri R.K. Singh, Tehsildar, who prepared dying declaration Ex.Ka-13, which was recorded at Safdarj
The dying declaration, if found to be true, voluntary, and reliable, can be the sole basis for conviction without the need for corroboration. The court may rely on the dying declaration as the primar....
The dying declaration was the sole basis for conviction, and the distinction between 'murder' and 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' under Section 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code was cr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on dying declaration as a sole basis for conviction under Section 302/34 of IPC, the interpretation of Section 498A of IPC, and the ap....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of evaluating dying declarations and medical opinions in cases of criminal offenses.
Point of Law : Hostility of witnesses of fact cannot demolish the value and reliability of the dying declaration of the deceased, which has been proved by prosecution in accordance with law and is a ....
The dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if it is true, reliable, and recorded in accordance with law. The cause of death due to septicaemia led to the classification of the offence....
The judgment established the distinction between culpable homicide and murder under the IPC, and applied recent legal principles allowing for reduced incarceration periods for similar offenses.
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
