HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
RAJAN ROY, RAJEEV BHARTI, JJ.
Sujeet – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1633 of 2022
Decided On : 09-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the case and initiation of investigation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. details of medical examination and death. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 3. key issues for consideration. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. reliance on dying declaration. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 5. arguments made by counsel. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. court's evaluation of the reliability of evidence. (Para 23 , 24) |
| 7. judicial standards for dying declarations. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 8. necessity of voluntary and truthful statements. (Para 32 , 33) |
| 9. errors in the recording process affecting reliability. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 10. conclusion on the legal standard of proof. (Para 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 11. final judgment and implications. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 12. outcome of the appeal and release order. (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
Judgment :
Rajeev Bharti, J.
1. The present criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused/appellant, namely, Sujeet s/o Nanhke, r/o Mohalla Haniya Tola, Police Station- Kheri, District- Lakhimpur Kheri challenging the judgment and order 06.05.2022 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri in S.T. No.15 of 2019, arising out of Crime No.198 of 2018, Police Station- Kheri, District- Lakhimpur Kheri, convicting and sentencing the appellant to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. with a fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo one month simple imprisonment. The accused/appellant was acquitted from the charges under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 4 of D.P. Act. The alternate charge under Section 302 I.P.C. was found proved. The appellant is in jail. He remained incarcerated for 8 years, 01 month and 08 days with remission as per Report dated 18.11.2025.
Factual Matrix of the case
2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that the deceased Hema, wife of the appellant, was subjected to cruelty for dowry and was set on fire on 16.06.2018, as a result she succumbed to her burn injuries on 05.07.2018. The complainant, father of the deceased, Raju (P.W.1), lodged a police report on 16.06.2018 stating that he had solemnized marriage of his daughter Hema about three years ago with Sujeet s/o Nanhke, r/o Haniya Tola, Kheri. On 16.06.2018 at about 8:00 P.M. he heard some noise and came in the locality and when he went towards that place, he saw that there was chaos in the house where his daughter was married, when he reached near the house, he found his daughter Hema was burning with fire outside the door of the house. There was no person present inside the house, as all had fled. Raju-PW-1, in his statement, has stated that when the deceased was taken to hospital by the accused, he also went along. He has further stated that his daughter (deceased) was suffering from mental illness and, on account of the same, she poured oil on herself and set herself ablaze. He has also stated that accused Sujeet had got Hema treated. According to the complainant, his son-in-law, Sujeet s/o Nanhke along with mother-in-law-Arjunia and sisters-in-law, namely, Rekha, Shakuntala and Rinki, set his daughter ablaze. He (the complainant) had made every possible efforts to save his daughter, but she had already sustained severe burn injuries. He immediately took his daughter to the District Hospital where her condition was stated to be extremely serious.
3. On the basis of the aforesaid report, FIR under Sections 147, 307 I.P.C. came to be lodged on 17.06.2018 at 12:05 P.M. and was registered by Shri Umesh Pratap Singh (P.W.8), Constable at Nighasan Police Station, who deposed that he was present at the Kheri Police Station on that date and at about 12:05 P.M., the complainant, Raju s/o Thakur Prasad, r/o Bukhari Tola, Kheri town and police station, came to the police station and submitted a written complaint. He deposed that investigation of the case was assigned to Sub-Inspector Shri Vishambhar Dayal Singh. During cross-examination, Shri Umesh Pratap Singh (P.W.8)


Paparambaka Rosamma and others Vs. State of A.P.
Lokesh and Ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Naresh Kumar Vs. Kalawati and others
Samsul Haque Vs. State of Assam
A dying declaration is only valid if the victim was in a fit mental state to give it, which wasn't established; thus, conviction based solely on it is unsafe.
A dying declaration must be made when the victim is in a fit mental state; mere consciousness is insufficient for reliability.
Dying declarations must be substantiated by medical fitness certifications and corroborating witness accounts; failure to do so undermines their reliability leading to altered convictions.
A dying declaration must be trustworthy and corroborated; significant discrepancies in the statement led to acquittal due to reasonable doubt not established by prosecution.
The court ruled that a dying declaration must be credible and recorded under proper conditions; discrepancies and lack of corroborative evidence led to the acquittal of the appellant.
A dying declaration must be supported by evidence of the declarant's mental fitness; absence of such certification undermines its reliability as a basis for conviction.
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.