2024 Supreme(Online)(SC) 590
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
NAEEM – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent
Crl.A. No.-001978-001978 / 2022
Advocates:
Petitioner's Advocate: MRS. VIPIN GUPTA
Respondent's Advocate: SUDEEP KUMAR
Reliability of dying declaration as the sole basis for conviction and the requirement of specific role attribution to each accused in the dying declaration.
Headnote:
Dying Declaration - Criminal Appeal - The court upheld the conviction and sentence of the accused based on the dying declaration of the deceased, which was found to be trustworthy, reliable, and free from any effort to induce false statement. The court acquitted two of the accused due to lack of specific role attributed in the dying declaration, while dismissing the appeal of the third accused.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased alleged in her dying declaration that she was set ablaze by the accused/appellants who had been pressuring her into entering the profession of immoral trafficking and prostitution. The trial court found the accused guilty and convicted them for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the dying declaration to be true and free from any effort to induce the deceased to make a false statement. It acquitted two of the accused due to lack of specific role attributed in the dying declaration, while dismissing the appeal of the third accused.
Issues: The main issue was the reliability of the dying declaration as the sole basis for conviction, and the specific role attributed to each accused in the dying declaration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction if it inspires the full confidence of the court and is true and voluntary. The court also emphasized that the rule requiring corroboration is merely a rule of prudence.
Final Decision: The court acquitted two of the accused due to lack of specific role attributed in the dying declaration, while dismissing the appeal of the third accused.
JUDGEMENT
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1. These appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 17th December 2019, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1589 of 2018 and 7393 of 2017, whereby the Division Bench dismissed both the criminal appeals preferred by the appellants, namely, Pappi @ Mashkoor (accused No.1), Naeema (accused No.2) and Naeem (accused No.3) and upheld the order of conviction and sentence dated 24th October 2017 as recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Moradabad (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial court’) in Sessions Trial No. 260 of 2017.
2. Shorn of details, the facts leading to the present appeals are as under:
2.1. On 1st December 2016, the Police Station Katghar, District Moradabad received a written report at 08:15 pm which was a transcription of the complaint made by Shahin Parveen (deceased) who had been admitted in the District Hospital, Moradabad on 1st December 2016, at 02:20 pm with 80% deep thermal and facial burns. In her complaint, the deceased had alleged that she had been set ablaze by the accused/appellants who had been pressuring her into entering the profession of immoral trafficking and prostitution. On the basis of the written report (Ext. Ka-3), a First Information Report (“FIR” for short) was registered at Police Station Katghar, District Moradabad vide Case Crime Number 1332 of 2016 for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”). On the same day, Raj Kumar Bhaskar (PW-5), the then Naib Tehsildar, Sadar, Moradabad was telephonically summoned by the Tehsildar to record the statement of Shahin Parveen (deceased), after she was admitted in the hospital. Between the hours of 08:48 pm and 09:15 pm, dying declaration of Shahin Parveen (deceased) (Ext. Ka-6) came to be recorded by PW-5. Subsequently, the victim was admitted in Safdarjang Hospital, New Delhi on 2nd December 2016, where she eventually succumbed to her injuries at 07:55 pm. Consequently, the Case Crime No. 1332 of 2016 was altered to the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. According to the Post-Mortem Report (Ext. Ka- 11), the cause of death was shock as a result of ante-mortem burn injuries.
2.2. After the death of the husband of the deceased two years prior to the incident, she had been residing at her matrimonial house with her two children along with Pappi @ Mashkoor (accused No. 1) who was her brother-in-law (devar) and his wife Naeema (accused No.2). Naeem (accused No.3) is Naeema’s brother. The prosecution case is that, after the death of the husband of the deceased, the accused/appellants started pressuring her into entering the profession of immoral trafficking and prostitution. As the deceased did not concede to the same, she was physically and sexually assaulted and asked to vacate the house. On the day of the incident at about 01:30 pm, the accused/appellants caught hold of the deceased and poured kerosene on her. Pappi @ Mashkoor (accused No.1) and Naeema (accused No.2) ignited the matchstick and threw it at her. Thereafter, the accused/appellants surrounded her so that she could not escape. On being set ablaze, the deceased ran out of the house whereafter her neighbours put out the fire and informed her mother and brother namely, Islam @ Babli (PW-2) who took her to the hospital. This version of events was brought out in the complaint made by the deceased which was transcribed by Faisal Zamal (PW-3). On the basis of PW-3’s written report, bearing the thumb impression of the deceased, the FIR came to be registered at 08:15 pm on 1st December 2016. Thereafter, on the same day, between 08:48 pm and 09:15 pm, PW-5 recorded the dying declaration of the deceased (Ext. Ka-6) wherein she stated that there was an outstanding dispute between her and Pappi @ Mashkoor (accused No.1) with regards to the partition of their shared residence. On the date of the incident at about 12:30 pm, another quar
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
