Back
2024 Supreme(UK) 370
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RITU BAHRI, C.J., ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Radha Arya – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 324 of 2014
Decided On : 14-03-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ramji Srivastava.
For the Respondents: J.S. Virk, Bhaskar Chandra Joshi.
IMPORTANT POINT
A dying declaration must be credible and made in a fit mental state to be admissible as the sole basis for conviction.
Headnote:
Dying Declaration - Criminal Appeal - IPC Section 302 - The court discussed the admissibility and reliability of dying declarations, emphasizing the need for the declarant's mental fitness and the absence of coercion, ultimately leading to the acquittal of the accused due to insufficient evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for murdering her husband by setting him on fire after a domestic dispute. The deceased made a dying declaration implicating her, but the court questioned its reliability due to the extent of his injuries and his mental state at the time.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly regarding the reliability of the dying declaration and the circumstantial evidence presented.
Issues: Whether the dying declaration was admissible and credible, and whether the prosecution established a complete chain of circumstantial evidence to support the conviction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if it is found to be truthful and voluntary, but in this case, doubts about the deceased's mental state and the lack of corroborative evidence led to the acquittal.
Result: The appeal is allowed, and the appellant is acquitted of the charge under Section 302 IPC.
JUDGMENT :
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
1. The present Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 23.09.2014, passed by learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 109 of 2012, State Vs. Smt. Radha Arya, by which, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (in short “IPC”).
2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that informant Smt. Panuli Devi’s brother Ram Lal Arya (deceased) was posted as an inspector at the Police Headquarters. He resided in Indra Nagar, Dehradun with his wife Radha Arya (appellant-accused), son Dinesh Kumar (DW1) and daughter Hem Lata Arya. His second daughter Tanuja Arya was studying in Pant Nagar University. At the time of the incident, she was not residing with the deceased in Indra Nagar. There were frequent altercations between the deceased and his wife. His wife suspicious of him. There were altercations between them on 30.03.2012. On the morning of 31.03.2012, when he was coming out of the bathroom, his wife poured petrol on him from a can and set him on fire. He was badly burnt by the fire. He was taken by Meherban Singh Kunwar (PW4) in 108 Ambulance to Government Coronation Hospital, Dehradun, where he was examined by Dr. Sandeep Chaudhari (PW6) at 8:45 a.m. He was found 85% burnt. The smell of petrol was coming from his body.
3. Ram Lal’s dying declaration (Ext. Ka.10) was recorded by Kusum Chauhan (PW10), the then Tehsildar, at Government Coronation Hospital, Dehradun on 31.03.2012 at around 10:35 a.m. Before the dying declaration was recorded, Dr. Sandeep Chaudhary (PW6) endorsed (Ext. Ka.17) that the patient was fully conscious and in a position to give a statement.
4. Kusum Chauhan (PW10) introduced herself as a Magistrate and asked questions to Ram Lal and recorded his answer, which is as follows:
“My name is Ram Lal. My father’s name is Late Shri Gusain Ram. I reside in Indra Nagar Vasant Vihar. Presently, I am Inspector at Police Headquarters. My wife is in stress since 2006. She thinks that I am marrying for the second time. Due to her stress, I tried to get her treated but she did not even take the medicine. This morning, around 8-8:30, my wife poured petrol on me, took out a matchstick and set me on fire. Neighbors and my son saved me and took me to the hospital. My wife set me on fire. I just don’t have anything else to say.” (This is the translated version of the original which is in Hindi script). His left thumb impression was taken on the statement. An endorsement (Ext. Ka. 18) was made by Dr. Sandeep Chaudhary (PW6) on the statement to the effect that the said statement was taken in his presence. After first aid, the injured was referred to Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Hospital, Delhi. He succumbed to his injuries on 01.04.2012 at 9:45 a.m. in the hospital.”
5. ASI Khursheed Ali (PW7) rushed to the mortuary and drew inquest proceedings on the dead body and prepared an inquest report (Ext. Ka.6). He also recorded statement of Dinesh Kumar (Ext. Ka.8), the son of the deceased.
6. The post-mortem examination of the dead body was conducted on 02.04.2012 by Dr. Rajendra Barua (PW8). As per the brief history, recorded by Dr. Rajendra Barua (PW8), the deceased allegedly sustained burn injuries at home on 31.03.2012 at around 8:00 a.m. He was taken to hospital in Dehradun from where he was referred to Lok Nayak hospital where he expired during the course of treatment on 01.04.2012 at 9:45 a.m. Dr. Rajendra Barua (PW8) received Hospital Case Records and as per the said records, the deceased had suffered 90% burns. According to the post-mortem report (Ext. Ka.9), “superficial to deep burn injuries were present all over body including face except front and back of lower part of abdomen, genitalia and soles........”
7. According to the inquest report, the deceased was strongly built and post-mortem report reveals that he was of average built
