SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 12002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Deepak Diwakar – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 1205 of 2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vijay Laxmi Soni
For the Respondents: Sourabh Sahu

A dying declaration is admissible and may serve as the sole basis for conviction, even if recorded by a police officer, provided it is voluntary, truthful, and supported by medical certification confirming the declarant was in a fit state of mind at the time of the statement.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 313 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 32(1) - Dying declaration - Law does not provide a specific format for recording a dying declaration, nor does it mandate that it be recorded by a Magistrate - A dying declaration can be recorded by any person, including a police officer, provided it is shown that the declarant was in a fit state of mind, and the statement was made voluntarily and truthfully. (Paras 21, 33, 35)

(B) Dying Declaration - Admissibility and Reliability - If a dying declaration is credible, the court can convict the accused even without corroboration - A certificate appended by a medical officer regarding the patient's fitness to make a statement is a crucial factor to ensure the authenticity and reliability of the statement. (Paras 17, 21, 33)

Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for the murder of the deceased by administering rat poison following disputes over dowry and domestic labor. The prosecution's case primarily rested on a dying declaration recorded by a police officer, corroborated by medical certification of the deceased's fitness and witness testimony.

Findings of Court:
The medical evidence confirmed the presence of poison in the system of the deceased, and the court found the testimony of the medical experts and other witnesses to be credible. The dying declaration, recorded in the presence of a doctor, was determined to be voluntary, consistent, and reliable.

Issues: Whether a dying declaration recorded by an Investigating Officer without the presence of a Magistrate is admissible, and whether the medical certification provided was sufficient to establish the declarant's fitness to make the statement.

Ratio Decidendi: The legal requirement for a dying declaration is that the declarant must be in a fit state of mind and the statement must be voluntary. As long as these criteria are satisfied and supported by medical opinion, the document is admissible and can serve as the sole basis for a conviction, regardless of whether a Magistrate or a police officer performed the recording.

Result: Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld.

Table of Content
1. summary of prosecution case, procedural history, and trial court conviction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. appellants challenge the reliability of the dying declaration; state defends its admissibility. (Para 7 , 8)
3. unnatural death confirmed based on medical evidence and presence of poison. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. governing principles for admissibility and assessment of dying declarations under section 32(1) evidence act. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
5. dying declaration, if voluntary and medically certified, is reliable sole evidence for conviction. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
6. trial court conviction affirmed; appeal dismissed. (Para 37 , 38 , 39)

Judgment on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, CJ

1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.09.2021 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mungeli, District Mulgeli (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. 39/2019, whereby learned trial Court has convicted the appellants for offences under Sections 302 of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.2,000/- each, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one year to each appellant.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 08.06.2019, the accused allegedly made the deceased, Sama Diwakar, consume rat poison on the pretext that she did not sell liquor and had brought insufficient dowry. She was taken to the District Hospital, Mungeli for treatment. The hospital informed the City Kotwali Police Station, Mungeli vide Ex.P.15, pursuant to which treatment was administered to Sama Diwakar. The concerned police station recorded a complaint as Ex.P.16A, on the basis of which her medical examination was conducted as per Ex.P.16. The police also sought an opinion from the Medical Officer, Mungeli, regarding whether the deceased was in a condition to give a statement. In this regard, an intimation was recorded as per Ex.P.30, and as per Ex.P.17, Dr. K.S. Kanwar (PW-10) opined that Sama Diwakar was fit to give a statement, following which her statement was recorded as per Ex.P.18.

3. The District Hospital, Mungeli referred Sama Diwakar to a higher centre for treatment as per Ex.P.19; however, her family admitted her to Mahima Hospital, Mungeli, where her medical examination was conducted as per Ex.P.20 and Ex.P.21. Thereafter, she was taken home by her father, Deshraj Dahariya (PW-1). Upon deterioration of her condition, she was admitted to CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur, where she died during treatment. The City Kotwali Police Station, Bilaspur (CIMS Outpost), registered the inquest intimation as per Ex.P.14 and issued a duty certificate as per Ex.P.4. The inquest report was prepared as per Ex.P.3, and an application for post-mortem examination was submitted. The post-mortem was conducted at CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur as per Ex.P.22. Since the incident occurred within the jurisdiction of Lalpur Police Station, the intimation was transferred accordingly as per Ex.P.23. The First Information Report was registered as per Ex.P.24. Dowry articles were seized as per seizure memo Ex.P.25, and a panchnama was prepared as per Ex.P.7. The spot map was prepared as per Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lormi, registered as Criminal Case No. 610/2019. As the offences were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed, and the accused were taken into custody as per the surrender order dated 04.10.2019, leading to registration of Sessions Case No. 39/2019.

4. Charges under Sections 304B and 302 of the IPC were framed against the accused by the learned trial Court. The charges were read over and explained to them, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. During their examination under Section 313 of the CrPC, the accused denied the prosecution allegations and stated

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top