The court established that a dying declaration, when properly recorded and corroborated, is admissible and sufficient for conviction, despite procedural concerns regarding its recording.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Dhari Singh, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed against a judgement and order dated 12.09.1985 passed by the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in ST No. 319 of 1980 whereby the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants Bhanwarkali and Shyam Kali to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each under section 302/34 IPC and in case of default in payment of fine, they shall further undergo imprisonment for three months.

2. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 02.02.2026, criminal appeal filed on behalf of the appellant Bhanwarkali has been disposed of as abated and now this Court is only concerned with the appeal of Shyam Kali.

Facts of the case

3. The facts that formed the bedrock of the present appeal are that a written report was given at police station Baghpat at 11:00 PM on 30.05.1979 by Tota Ram, son of Sher Singh, resident of Village Saroorpur Kalan (hereinafter referred to as the first informant) with the allegations inter alia that he got her daughter married to Shiv Kumar, son of Ziley Singh about five years back. There were certain differences, which were mutually resolved. On 29.05.1979, i.e. a day before the occurrence. The daughter of the first informant, Smt. Santosh went to her in-law’s house with Ziley Singh and Sarpanch Kalu Ram. On 30.5.1979, a person from village Mawi Kalan informed him that his daughter has been burnt. On that information, the first informant reached the village Mawi Kalan where he came to know that Bhanwar Kali had sprinkled kerosene on the body of the Smt. Santosh and Shyam Kali had set her on fire with an intention to kill her, due to which she had badly injured. The first informant took his daughter to Delhi Hospital where after getting her admitted, went to the police station and lodged the report. The first information report further recounts that in the incident in question, Ziley Singh and his son have also hands because before before leaving the house, they had given certain instructions to the accused.

4. On the basis of the aforesaid information, a Chik report was prepared for the offence at 11:00 PM on 30.5.1979. On completion of investigation, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet against the appellants.

5. Before the first information report could be lodged PW-6, ASI Ranbir Singh, who was posted as In-Charge, Out Post, on getting Medico Legal Sheet through Constable Ram Autar, in respect of Smt. Santosh, he rushed to the spot and recorded the dying declaration of Smt. Santosh (hereinafter referred to as the deceased), which ended at 06:15 PM on 30.5.1979. The deceased died in Delhi, but before her death, her dying declaration was recorded.

6. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions, where case was registered as ST No. 319 of 1980 and the learned 7^th Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, vide order dated 28.10.1980 framed the charges against the accused-appellants under Section 302/34 IPC, which was read over and explained to the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. To bring home guilt of the appellants, the prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses. PW- 1, Total Ram, is the first informant of the case, PW-2, Smt. Mahendri is the mother of the deceased, PW-3, Pran Sukh Sharma was the Chik writer of the FIR, PW-4, Dr. Vishnu Kumar, who inspected the body of the deceased after her death, PW-5, Dr. P.K. Govila, who proved the admission slip and endorsement of Dr. Ashok Gupta and PW-