Dying Declaration by Victim with 90-95% Burns is Admissible and Can Be Sole Basis for Conviction: Gujarat High Court - 2025-10-06

Gujarat High Court Overturns Acquittal in Murder Case, Upholds Validity of Dying Declaration from Victim with 95% Burns

AHMEDABAD: In a significant ruling, the Gujarat High Court has overturned the acquittal of two women accused of setting another woman on fire, holding that a dying declaration made by a victim with 90-95% burn injuries is admissible and can be the sole basis for conviction if it inspires confidence. The division bench of Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy and Justice D. M. Vyas convicted the two accused of murder, setting aside a 2012 trial court judgment.

Case Background: From Acquittal to Conviction

The State of Gujarat had appealed the acquittal of Chandrikaben Ramavat (A1) and her cousin sister (A2) by the District and Sessions Judge, Porbandar. The two were accused of murdering Komalben on March 6, 2010. The prosecution alleged that Chandrikaben, suspecting Komalben of having an affair with her husband, went to Komalben's residence with her cousin. They allegedly beat the victim, dragged her into the kitchen, poured kerosene on her, and set her ablaze. Komalben succumbed to her injuries, which were certified as 90-95% burns, the next day.

The trial court had acquitted the accused, primarily on the grounds that a person with such severe burns would not be in a fit state to give a statement and that the victim's thumb impressions on her declarations were doubtful.

Prosecution vs. Defense Arguments

The prosecution's case rested heavily on two dying declarations made by the deceased: one recorded by an Executive Magistrate (Exh. 23) and another, more detailed statement, recorded by a Police Sub Inspector (Exh. 64), which was treated as the FIR. The prosecution also presented testimony from the deceased's 10-year-old brother (PW-12), who confirmed the accused's presence and the initial assault.

The defense argued that the victim may have committed suicide due to marital disputes. They vehemently challenged the dying declarations, contending that the victim's physical condition—suffering from 90-95% burns, a respiratory infection, and damaged vocal cords—made it impossible for her to give a coherent statement. They further argued that since her thumbs were completely burnt, obtaining a valid thumb impression was not feasible.

High Court's Analysis: Upholding the Sanctity of a Dying Declaration

The High Court meticulously dismantled the trial court's reasoning and the defense's arguments, relying on established legal principles and Supreme Court precedents.

On the Reliability of the Dying Declaration

The Court rejected the notion that the severity of burn injuries automatically invalidates a dying declaration. It cited several Supreme Court judgments, including Mafabhai Nagarbhai Raval v. State of Gujarat and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dal Singh , where declarations from victims with 99% and even 100% burns were accepted.

"As per the dictum laid down in the aforesaid judgments by the Apex Court, the legal position is very clear that even a person who sustained 99% or even 100% burn injuries would be capable of giving Dying Declaration and the said Dying Declaration cannot be rejected on the ground that the injured sustained 90-95% burn injuries," the bench observed.

The court noted that both the Magistrate and the police officer had satisfied themselves of the victim's conscious state before recording her statements, which is the essential requirement of the law.

On the Validity of Thumb Impressions

Addressing the doubt over the thumb impressions, the Court again referred to the Supreme Court's ruling in Dal Singh (supra) , stating that unless it is proven that the skin, ridges, and curves of the thumb were completely damaged, the impression cannot be dismissed. The bench emphasized that the defense had failed to establish this fact during the trial.

Treating Police Statement as a Dying Declaration

The High Court affirmed that the detailed statement recorded by the police (Exh. 64) could be treated as a dying declaration under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, as the victim subsequently died. This statement provided a vivid, consistent account of the crime, corroborating the earlier declaration made to the magistrate.

Final Verdict and Implications

The High Court concluded that the trial court's findings were "perverse" and "run counter to the well established principles of law." It held that the two dying declarations were truthful, voluntary, and inspired full confidence, making them a sufficient sole basis for conviction.

"The statements given by her are true, voluntary and inspires full confidence in the mind of the Court regarding the veracity of the statements given by her. So, they can safely be relied on and can be the sole basis to arrive at a just conclusion that A1 and A2 are the culprits who have committed the murder of the deceased," the judgment stated.

The bench found the two respondents guilty of house-trespass (Section 452 IPC) and murder (Section 302 IPC). The acquittal for these charges was set aside, and the Court issued non-bailable warrants to secure the presence of the convicted women for a hearing on the quantum of their sentence.