Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Vijay Kumar Shukla and Rajendra Kumar Verma, JJ.
ANTAR SINGH AND OTHERS - APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF M. P. – RESPONDENT
Cri. Appeal No. 1202 of 2010
Decided On : 16-12-2022
Dying Declarations - Criminal Law - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374 - Section 302, Section 498-A, Section 376 of IPC
Fact of the Case:
The deceased Laxmibai was allegedly set ablaze by the appellants. Multiple dying declarations were recorded, some of which were contradictory. The trial court convicted the appellants based on the dying declaration recorded by a Tehsildar, while the defense argued that the statements were afterthought and influenced by family members.
Finding of the Court:
The court found inconsistencies and contradictions in the dying declarations and witness statements, leading to the acquittal of the appellants. The court emphasized the importance of scrutinizing dying declarations and the need for reliability and consistency.
Issues: Reliability of dying declarations, contradictions in witness statements, influence on the deceased's statements
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for scrutiny and reliability of dying declarations, especially when multiple contradictory declarations are present. Inconsistencies and lack of corroboration led to the acquittal of the appellants.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the appellants were acquitted of the charges under Section 302, 498-A, and 376 of IPC.
JUDGMENT :
RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA), J. : -
Appellants have preferred this appeal under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Code’) against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 9-9-2010 passed in Sessions Trial No. 190/2009 passed by 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain, whereby the all the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 09 months R.I. In addition appellant No. 1/Antar Singh and Appellant No. 2 Chandu have also been convicted for the offence punishable under section 498-A of IPC and 376 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 3 years and 10 years respectively with fine of Rs. 200/-200/- and with default stipulations.
2. The prosecution story, briefly stated, is that on 28-12-2007 at about 2PM, when the injured/deceased Laxmibai was taking the kerosene oil for ablazing the stove, the kerosene oil was poured accidentally on her and she was ablazed on fire and on crying, her brother-in-law Kailash has tried to save her by pouring water and taken her to the Community Health Center, Tarana. After primary treatment at CHC, Tarana, the matter was intimated to the police station Tarana, Ujjain. Head Constable Bherulal (PW-15) of Police Station- Tarana reached to the hospital and recorded the statement of the injured Laxmibai and Kailash on 28-12-2007 vide Ex.D/5 and Ex.D/4 respectively. On 29-12-2007, at District Hospital Ujjain her statements were recorded vide Ex.D/6 by Assistant Land Measurement Officer, Prakash Bhotra (DW-1) at about 12.30 PM in which she has narrated the story as narrated to PW-15 Bherulal. Thereafter, on 3-1-2008, Police Station Tarana has informed the SHO, Police Station Kaitha, Ujjain regarding the incident and Sanha Janch with Rojnamcha Sanha, MLC Report alongwith the statements of injured and Kailash. Thereafter, on 4-1-2008, C.S. Bamniya, SHO of Police Station Kaitha reached to the District Hospital Ujjain where a letter/application (Ex.P/22) was written by the injured to SHO for recording of her statements submitting that earlier statements were wrongly given by her in pressure. He recorded her statements at about 1.30 PM on 4-1-2008 and also called the Tehsildar, Ujjain who has also taken her statements vide Ex.P/16 wherein she narrated that her brother-in-law (applicant Chandu) has outraged her modesty, she told this incident to her mother-in-law (appellant Bhanwarbai) and thereafter, they have set her on fire by pouring kerosene oil and neighbour Dilip and Raysingh Gurjar have saved her and Dilip had taken her to the hospital. In the statements, she has also alleged that the appellants were demanding dowry again and again. On the basis of the aforesaid statements recorded on 4-1-2008, the police has registered the FIR against the appellants under section 307, 376/34 of IPC. Thereafter, during treatment, the injured died on 6-1-2008, hence later on, offence under section 302 of IPC was also added.
3. During investigation, the investigating agency prepared spot map, recorded the case diary statements of the witnesses and after following the due process, filed the charge-sheet against the appellants.
4. Appellants were charged for offence under section 302, 376 and 498-A of I.P.C. They abjured their guilt and took a plea that they have been falsely implicated in the present crime and prays for trial.
5. In support of the case of prosecution, the prosecution has examined as many as 17 witnesses namely Dr. D. B. Purohit (PW-1), Gyaneshwari (PW-2), Sunder Singh (PW-3), Narendra Gome (PW-4), Bhanwarsingh (PW-5), Dr. Ajay (PW-6), Samanbai (PW-7), Vasudev (PW-8), Meharban (PW-9), Nanuram (PW-10), Gokulsingh (PW-11), Kailash Chandra (PW-12), A. K. Sharma (PW-13), Rajendra Shamra (PW-14), Bherulal (PW-15), Rajeev Singh (PW-16) and Chander Singh (PW-17).
6. In defense, the appellants have examined Prakash Bhothr
The reliability and consistency of dying declarations are crucial in criminal cases, especially when multiple contradictory declarations are present.
A dying declaration can serve as the sole basis for conviction if it meets the criteria of truthfulness, voluntariness, and absence of suspicion, as established by the Indian Evidence Act and relevan....
A dying declaration can serve as the sole basis for conviction if it is credible, voluntary, and corroborated by other evidence, despite inconsistencies in earlier statements.
The admissibility and reliability of dying declarations as a sole basis for conviction, as established by various Supreme Court cases.
Inconsistent dying declarations cannot suffice for conviction without corroborating evidence, especially when procedural guidelines for a fair trial are not met.
The admissibility of dying declarations without a certification of the victim's mental state and the reliance on circumstantial evidence in establishing guilt.
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
