Back
High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Vivek Rusia, Shailendra Shukla, JJ.
RAGHURAM @ RAGHORAM s/o CHHOGALAL BALAI – APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – RESPONDENT
Cri. Appeal No. 285 of 2009
Decided On : 31-07-2021
Dying Declaration - Conviction under section 302 of Indian Penal Code - 302 - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court: The court discussed the admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration under section 32 of the Evidence Act and the scrutiny required for its acceptance. It also considered the principle of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus and the weightage to be attributed to the evidence of hostile witnesses. The court analyzed the evidence related to the cause of burns to the deceased and the defense of accidental burns due to a chimney, suicide, and the accused setting his wife ablaze. The court also examined the medical evidence, the timing and recording of the dying declaration, and the conduct of the accused in light of the Indian Evidence Act. The court affirmed the conviction under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentence imposed by the trial court.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Subhadra Bai, was brought to the hospital in a burnt condition and succumbed to her injuries. The appellant, her husband, was convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code based on the dying declaration of the deceased, despite the defense's arguments against its reliability and the alternative explanations for the cause of burns.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the death of Subhadra Bai was a result of culpable homicide and affirmed the conviction of the appellant under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The court also affirmed the sentence imposed on the appellant by the trial court.
Issues: The issues revolved around the admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration, the weightage to be given to the evidence of hostile witnesses, the examination of the cause of burns to the deceased, the timing and recording of the dying declaration, and the conduct of the accused in light of the Indian Evidence Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the dying declaration as a sole basis for conviction, scrutinizing its reliability and the surrounding circumstances. The court also considered the evidence of hostile witnesses and the conduct of the accused in determining culpability.
Final Decision: The court affirmed the conviction of the appellant under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentence imposed by the trial court.
JUDGMENT SHAILENDRA SHUKLA, J. : – This appeal under section 374, Criminal Procedure Code has been preferred against the judgment dated 3-3-2009 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Badwah, West Nimar (M.P.) in S.T. No. 144/2008, whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 200/-. In lieu of payment of fine amount, the appellant has been directed to undergo one month’s additional imprisonment.
2. Admitted facts are that deceased Subhadra Bai is the wife of appellant Raghuram and witnesses Kavita and Roshani are the children of appellant and the deceased.
3. The prosecution story in short is that on 4-6-2008 at about 10.20 P.M. Subhadra Bai, wife of the appellant, was brought to Government Hospital at Sanawad in burnt condition. She was found to have suffered 100% burns, there was smell of kerosene coming from her body and clothes. The doctor on duty recorded her dying declaration, in which she levelled allegations against the appellant i.e. her husband as the one who had poured kerosene over her and burnt her. She was referred to M.Y. Hospital, Indore, where she succumbed to her injuries at 12.30 A.M. on 5-6-2008. The panchnama of the dead body was then executed and the body was sent for postmortem. The investigating officer Shri S. S. Udawat (PW-17) drew the spot map, seized incriminating articles from the house of the accused which had been sealed immediately after the incident. The seized articles were sent to FSL for scientific analysis and after investigation charge-sheet was filed under section 302 of Indian Penal Code.
4. After committal, the ASJ, Barwaha framed the charge under section 302 of Indian Penal Code against the appellant, who abjured his guilt. The prosecution thereafter examined 17 witnesses in support. In his accused statement, the appellant has stated that while he was sitting outside his house, his wife rushed out enveloped in flames and in attempt to save her, the appellant himself received burn injuries on his hands and face. The appellant has examined three defence witnesses in his support.
5. In the appeal which has been preferred, it has been stated that dying declaration which has been recorded by Dr. R. S. Patidar (PW-7) is a highly unreliable document which is not corroborated in any material particulars by any independent source and no weightage can be attributed to it, that children of the deceased have not supported the prosecution story, that upper part of the head of deceased had received no burn injuries which demolishes the theory of kerosene being poured on her, that dying declaration contains thumb impression of the deceased which is against the postmortem report, as per which the doctor had certified 100% burns on the body of the deceased, that the dying declaration is said to have been recorded from 9.30 P.M. to 9.40 P.M. and in the meanwhile deceased has been referred to M.Y. Hospital, Indore at 9.35 P.M., that the factum of appellant having himself got burnt has not been brought out by prosecution, that there is no pre MLC which is usually done when a patient is brought straight to the hospital, that condition of Subhadra Bai was so grave that she could not have made any dying declaration and, therefore, the conviction cannot be sustained under these circumstances.
6. The question which arises for consideration is whether in view of the grounds taken in the appeal and the oral submissions by learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, the appellant deserves to be acquitted?
7. Learned counsel for the appellant, at the outset, has pointed out that witnesses Kailash (PW-2), Kamla Bai (PW-3), Roshani (PW-4), Nandu (PW-5), Madan (PW-6) have all turned hostile and their evidence carries no evidentiary value.
8. Submissions were considered.
9. The principle of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is not applicable in India, meaning thereby that even a hostile witness who partly supports the p
AI
The admissibility and reliability of dying declarations, the scrutiny required for their acceptance, and the weightage to be attributed to the evidence of hostile witnesses were the central legal pri....
The admissibility and reliability of dying declarations as a sole basis for conviction, as established by various Supreme Court cases.
A dying declaration can serve as the sole basis for conviction if it is credible and free from infirmities; however, significant discrepancies and doubts regarding its reliability necessitate caution....
The reliability and consistency of dying declarations are crucial in criminal cases, especially when multiple contradictory declarations are present.
The admissibility of dying declaration and the determination of the appropriate legal provision for the conviction based on the nature of the offence and the actions of the accused.
Dying declarations can serve as sole basis for conviction if deemed reliable, conscious, and voluntary.
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
