LawforAll

advocatemmmohan

My photo
since 1985 practicing as advocate in both civil & criminal laws

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - SHARE THE KNOWLEDGE

Saturday, January 5, 2013

Evidentiary value of Dying Declaration:=There is no particular form or procedure prescribed for recording a dying declaration nor it is required to be recorded only by a MagistrateAs a general rule, it is advisable to get the evidence of the declarant certified from a doctor. In appropriate cases, the satisfaction of the person recording the statement regarding the state of mind of the deceased would also be sufficient to hold that the deceased was in a position to make a statement. It is settled law that if the prosecution solely depends on the dying declaration, the normal rule is that the courts must exercise due care and caution to ensure genuineness of the dying declaration, keeping in mind that the accused had no opportunity to test the veracity of the statement of the deceased by cross-examination. As rightly observed by the High Court, the law does not insist upon the corroboration of dying declaration before it can be accepted. The insistence of corroboration to a dying declaration is only a rule of prudence. When the Court is satisfied that the dying declaration is voluntary, not tainted by tutoring or animosity, and is not a product of the imagination of the declarant, in that event, there is no impediment in convicting the accused on the basis of such dying declaration. When there are multiple dying declarations, each dying declaration has to be separately assessed and evaluated and assess independently on its own merit as to its evidentiary value and one cannot be rejected because of certain variation in the other.. = “32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant.- Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases:- (1) when it relates to cause of death.- When the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question. Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question. (2) ….. ….. ….. ….. (8) …. ….” It is clear from the above provision that the statement made by the deceased by way of a declaration is admissible in evidence under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act. It is not in dispute that her statement relates to the cause of her death. In that event, it qualifies the criteria mentioned in Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act. There is no particular form or procedure prescribed for recording a dying declaration nor it is required to be recorded only by a Magistrate. As a general rule, it is advisable to get the evidence of the declarant certified from a doctor. In appropriate cases, the satisfaction of the person recording the statement regarding the state of mind of the deceased would also be sufficient to hold that the deceased was in a position to make a statement. It is settled law that if the prosecution solely depends on the dying declaration, the normal rule is that the courts must exercise due care and caution to ensure genuineness of the dying declaration, keeping in mind that the accused had no opportunity to test the veracity of the statement of the deceased by cross-examination. As rightly observed by the High Court, the law does not insist upon the corroboration of dying declaration before it can be accepted. The insistence of corroboration to a dying declaration is only a rule of prudence. When the Court is satisfied that the dying declaration is voluntary, not tainted by tutoring or animosity, and is not a product of the imagination of the declarant, in that event, there is no impediment in convicting the accused on the basis of such dying declaration. When there are multiple dying declarations, each dying declaration has to be separately assessed and evaluated and assess independently on its own merit as to its evidentiary value and one cannot be rejected because of certain variation in the other. In spite of stringent legislations in order to curb the deteriorating condition of women across the country, the cases related to bride burning, cruelty, suicide, sexual harassment, rape, suicide by married women etc. have increased and are taking place day by day. A complete overhaul of the system is a must in the form of deterrent punishment for the offenders so that we can effectively deal with the problem. In the case on hand, Vandana died within 3 years of her marriage at the instance of her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law due to the harassment meted out to her because of the inability to conceive a child and she was poured kerosene and burnt to death. Even though, the mother-in-law, who also filed a separate appeal, died on 10.02.2012, in view of clinching evidence led in by the prosecution, there cannot be any leniency in favour of the appellants, who are sisters-in-law of the deceased and at whose instance the deceased was burnt at the hands of her mother-in-law. 19) Accordingly, while agreeing with the conclusion arrived at by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court, we find no merit in the appeal. Consequently, the same is dismissed.


                                  REPORTABLE


                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                     1 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1062 OF 2008



Ashabai & Anr.                                     .... Appellant(s)

            Versus

State of Maharashtra                          .... Respondent(s)

                                      2







                               J U D G M E N T

P.Sathasivam,J.

1)     This  appeal  is  directed  against  the  judgment  and  order  dated
11.04.2007 passed by the High  Court  of  Bombay,  Bench  at  Aurangabad  in
Criminal Appeal No. 252 of 2005 whereby the High Court dismissed the  appeal
filed by the appellants herein and  confirmed  the  order  dated  30.03.2005
passed by the Court of IInd Ad-hoc Additional  Sessions  Judge,  Jalgaon  in
Sessions Case No. 165 of 2003.


2)    Brief facts:
a)    On 28.02.2000, Vandana Raghunath Tayade (since deceased)  was  married
to one  Raghunath  Puna  Tayade  at  Village  Khirwad,  Taluq  Raver,  Dist.
Jalgaon, Maharashtra.  After marriage, she was staying  at  her  matrimonial
home in a joint family consisting of her husband, Kesharbai (A-1) mother-in-
law,  father-in-law  and  two  sisters-in-law,  viz.,   Ashabai  and  Kavita
(appellants herein).  Since there was no issue from the  marriage,  she  was
ill-treated by her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law.  On  that  count,  they
used to harass her and both the families were not in good terms.
b)     On  05.03.2003,  at  about  1645  hrs.,  when  Vandana  was  in   her
matrimonial home, Kesharbai (mother-in-law), in order to  get  rid  of  her,
poured kerosene on her body and Ashabai and  Kavita  (appellants  herein)  –
sisters-in-law instigated Kesharbai to lit the fire by using  a  matchstick.
She started shouting and caught hold  of  her  mother-in-law  in  the  burnt
condition.  Vandana and Kesharbai, both were taken to the Railway  Hospital,
Bhusawal and her statement was recorded  on  the  very  same  day.   Between
05.03.2003 to 06.03.2003, the injured gave, in  all,  4  dying  declarations
one by one to the authorities concerned.  On 18.04.2003,  she  succumbed  to
her injuries and the post-mortem was conducted on the same day  and  a  case
being A.D. No. 15 of 2003 was registered.
c)    After investigation,  charge  sheet  was  filed  against  six  accused
persons, i.e., Kesharbai (A-1), Ashabai Puna Tayade (A-2)  and  Kavita  Ajay
Medhe (A-3)-appellants herein, Puna Mitharam Tayade, Shobha  Sitaram  Tayade
and Sitaram Ramaji Tayade and the case was committed to  the  Court  of  the
IInd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge,  Jalgaon  and  numbered  as  Sessions
Case No. 165 of  2003.   The  Additional  Sessions  Judge,  by  order  dated
30.03.2005, convicted A-1,  A-2  and  A-3  under  Section  498-A  read  with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short ‘IPC’  )  and  sentenced
them to undergo RI for 1 year along with a fine  of  Rs.  1,000/-  each,  in
default, to further undergo RI for  3  months.   They  were  also  convicted
under Section 302 read with Section  34  of  IPC  and  sentenced  to  suffer
imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each, in default,  to
further undergo RI for 6 months and acquitted the other accused persons.
d)    Challenging the said judgment, the appellants  herein  filed  Criminal
Appeal No. 252 of 2005 before the  High  Court.   By  impugned  order  dated
11.04.2007, the High Court, dismissed the appeal  filed  by  the  appellants
herein and confirmed their conviction and sentence passed  against  them  by
the trial Court.
3)    Heard Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, learned counsel for the  appellants-
accused and Ms. Aprajita Singh, learned counsel for the State.
Discussion:
4)    The present appeal is by Ashabai (A-2) and Kavita  Ajay  Medhe  (A-3),
both sisters-in-law of the deceased.  Kesharbai  (A-1)  -  mother-in-law  of
the deceased, who was also convicted and sentenced to RI for  life  filed  a
separate appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 1063 of 2008  before  this  Court.
Since she  died  on  10.02.2012,  by  order  dated  13.12.2012,  this  Court
dismissed her appeal as abated.   Therefore,  we  are  concerned  about  the
present appellants, namely,  Ashabai  (A-2)  and  Kavita  Ajay  Medhe  (A-3)
respectively.
5)     The  marriage  of  the  deceased  Vandana  with  one  Raghunath   was
solemnized on 28.02.2000 and her death occurred  on  18.04.2003,  i.e.,  her
married life came to an end within 3 years  of  her  marriage.   The  entire
prosecution case lies on 4 dying declarations made by the deceased  and  the
oral evidence of PWs 1, 2, 3 and 11.
Dying Declaration No. 1 (Exh.76):
6)    The first dying declaration was recorded by Shri Dhondu (PW-14),  Sub-
inspector  of  Police,  Sarkarwade  P.S.,  Nasik  on  05.03.2003.   In   her
statement before PW-14, she narrated that her  marriage  was  solemnized  on
28.02.2000 at  Khirwar  and  she  was  residing  at  Shantinagar,  Someshwar
Colony, Bhusawal along with her husband-Raghunath,  Punna  -  father-in-law,
Kesharbai  -  mother-in-law,  Ashabai  and  Kavita  -  sisters-in-law.   She
further stated that her husband was working as an Assistant  Station  Master
at Bhusawal, her father-in-law retired from Railways and she along with  her
mother-in-law and sisters-in-law stayed at home. As  she  was  not  able  to
conceive even after 3 years of marriage, her mother-in-law  and  sisters-in-
law always used to abuse her that she was ‘barren’.  They used to  say  that
she should not stay in the house and better she would die.   On  04.01.2003,
all the three assaulted her in front of her  brother.    On  05.03.2003,  at
about 7 o’clock in the morning, when she entered into the house  along  with
her husband after their return from Mumbai, her mother-in-law  and  sisters-
in-law, viz., Ashabai and Kavita shouted that the barren lady has  come  and
telling her husband that he should not keep the unproductive lady  in  their
house.  After quarrelling with  her  mother-in-law,  her  husband  went  for
duty.  At about 4.45 p.m., when she came to her bedroom after taking a  wash
and was standing facing towards east in the place in  between  the  cupboard
and the cot, at that time, her mother-in-law –  Kesharbai  (A-1)  came  from
behind with her sisters-in-law Ashabai and Kavita. She was holding a tin  of
kerosene in her hands and she poured kerosene on  her  from  neck  to  legs.
While doing so, her sisters-in-law directed her mother-in-law to  light  the
matchstick.  Accordingly, the mother-in-law lit the matchstick.   On  seeing
this,  her  father-in-law  and  sisters-in-law  poured  water  on  her   and
extinguished the fire.  The above statement is duly certified by the  Doctor
on duty- Shri T.F. Ramesh  that  she  was  conscious  and  able  to  give  a
statement.  It is clear that in this declaration she has not implicated  her
husband and father-in-law.  On the other hand, she  asserted  that  she  was
tortured by her mother-in-law (A-1) and sisters-in-law (A-2 and  A-3).   She
also specified that it was her mother-in-law  who  poured  kerosene  on  the
direction of her sisters-in-law.
Dying Declaration No.2 (Exh. 45):
7)     This  statement  was  made  by  the  deceased  before  the  Executive
Magistrate, Bhusawal on 05.03.2003 at 11.10 p.m. which was  marked  as  Exh.
45 and is in  the  form  of  questions  and  answers.   When  the  Executive
Magistrate asked what had happened  on  that  day,  she  answered  that  “my
mother-in-law by name, Kesharbai  Puna  Tayde  poured  kerosene  on  me  and
burnt”.  She further mentioned that the said incident took  place  at  about
4.30 to 5.00 p.m. on 05.03.2003.  In respect  of  another  question  by  the
Magistrate, namely, who were there in  the  house,  she  answered  that  her
mother-in-law and sisters-in-law, by name, Ashabai and Kavita were there  in
the house and they told to light the matchstick.  She  also  mentioned  that
at the relevant time, her husband and father-in-law were not in  the  house.
The very same doctor, who certified her condition in the statement  recorded
by PW-14  also  certified  that  the  declarant  was  conscious  to  give  a
statement.  He also mentioned the date and time as 05.03.2003 at 11.10  p.m.
 This declaration, which was duly  recorded  by  the  Executive  Magistrate,
Bhusawal (PW-7) clearly shows that  it  was  her  mother-in-law  who  poured
kerosene on her on the direction of her sisters-in-law (A-2 and A-3).
Dying Declaration No.3 (Exh. 47):
8)    On 06.03.2003, injured Vandana  again  made  a  statement  before  the
Executive Magistrate, Bhusawal at 19:25 hrs.  Here again, her statement  was
recorded in the form of questions and answers.  The said document  has  been
marked  as  Exh.47.   After  narrating  that  her  marriage  took  place  on
28.02.2000 at Khirwar, she informed that her  mother-in-law  and  father-in-
law used to quarrel with her and her husband never  used  to  say  anything.
No doubt, in this statement,  she  mentioned  that  she  was  threatened  by
Shobha Sitaram Tayade (sister-in-law) and Sitaram Ramji Tayade  (husband  of
Shobha Sitaram Tayade).  After mentioning their names, (both  of  them  were
acquitted by the trial Court) she further narrated that  amongst  them,  her
mother-in-law  poured  kerosene  on  her  and  sisters-in-law  (Ashabai  and
Kavita) were standing by closing the door.  For  another  question,  namely,
whether she had suspicion on anyone, she answered that she was tried  to  be
burnt by her  mother-in-law  Kesharbai,  Ashabai,  Shobha,  Kavita,  Sitaram
Ramji Tayade.  While recording the above statement, here again, duty  Doctor
Dr. C.N. Pimprikar certified that Vandana was  fully  conscious  to  give  a
statement.  He also mentioned the time and date of recording  of  the  above
statement as 7:25 p.m. dated 06.03.2003.
9)    Learned counsel for the appellants pointed out certain  contradictions
and improvements which were not mentioned in her first two  statements.   It
is true that in the third statement made before  the  Executive  Magistrate,
she implicated Shobha and Sitaram Ramji Tayade and according  to  her,  they
also  threatened  her  along  with  her  mother-in-law  and  sisters-in-law.
Merely because she mentioned two other names,  who  were  acquitted  by  the
trial Court,  it  cannot  be  presumed  that  her  earlier  statements  were
unacceptable.  However, it is to be noted that even in the  third  statement
before the Executive Magistrate duly recorded  by  him,  she  mentioned  the
role of her  mother-in-law  and  sisters-in-law.   There  is  no  reason  to
disbelieve or reject the above statement as claimed by learned  counsel  for
the appellants.
Dying Declaration No.4 (Exh. 36):
10)   On 06.03.2003 itself, at about 7.30 p.m., again  the  injured  Vandana
made a  statement  before  Shri  Dilip,  Sub-Inspector  of  Police  who  was
examined as PW-6 and the statement was marked as Exh. 36.   Here  again,  in
respect of the questions put by  the  recording  officer,  she  answered  by
implicating her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law.  For a specific  question,
namely, on 05.03.2003, whether  she  was  at  home  and  how  she  got  burn
injuries and who was  responsible  for  the  same,  she  answered  that  “on
05.03.2003, I was at home only.  At  about  5  o’clock,  her  mother-in-law,
sisters-in-law poured kerosene and burnt”.   Here  again,  she  specifically
implicated her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law  for  pouring  kerosene  and
litting fire.
11)   Learned  counsel  for  the  appellants  argued  that  the  version  of
incident as given by the deceased in all  the  four  dying  declarations  is
inconsistent and no reliance can be placed on it.  We have already  referred
to the persons who recorded all the four statements, her condition  and  the
certificate issued by the doctor as well as the contents of the  statements.
 Though, in one of the statement, she implicated two more persons (who  were
acquitted by the trial Court) she was consistent about the  role  played  by
her mother-in-law and her sisters-in-law  (appellants  before  us).   It  is
relevant to note that  the  incident  took  place  in  the  bedroom  of  the
deceased.  It is also clear that she was subjected to  torture  as  she  had
not conceived a child even after three years of the marriage and in all  the
four dying declarations, she was conscious in mentioning  the  role  of  her
mother-in-law and  sisters-in-law.   We  are  satisfied  that  there  is  no
contradiction as to the main aspect, namely, implicating  her  mother-in-law
and sisters-in-law as well as the role played by them.
Evidentiary value of Dying Declaration:
12)   About the evidentiary value of dying declaration of the  deceased,  it is relevant to refer Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act,  1872,  
which reads as under:-
      32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who  is  dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant.- 
Statements, written or verbal,
      of relevant facts made by a person who  is  dead,  or  who  cannot  be
      found, or who has  become  incapable  of  giving  evidence,  or  whose
      attendance cannot be procured without an amount of  delay  or  expense
      which, under the circumstances of  the  case,  appears  to  the  Court
      unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases:-


      (1) when it relates to cause of death.- When the statement is made  by
      a person as  to  the  cause  of  his  death,  or  as  to  any  of  the
      circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases
      in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question.


      Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them  was  or
      was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of  death,
      and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of
      his death comes into question.


      (2) ….. …..
           ….. …..
      (8) …. ….”



It is clear from  the  above  provision  that  the  statement  made  by  the
deceased by way of a declaration is admissible  in  evidence  under  Section
32(1) of the Evidence Act.  
It is not in dispute that her statement  relates to the cause of her  death.   

In  that  event,  it  qualifies  the  criteria mentioned in Section 32(1) of the Evidence  Act.   

There  is  no  particular form or procedure prescribed for recording a dying  declaration  nor  it  is
required to be recorded only by a Magistrate.  
As  a  general  rule, 
 it  is
advisable to get the evidence of the declarant certified from a doctor.   
In
appropriate cases, the satisfaction of the person  recording  the  statement regarding the state of mind of the deceased  would  also  be  sufficient  to hold that the deceased was in  a  position  to  make  a  statement.  
It  is
settled  law  that  if  the  prosecution  solely  depends   on   the   dying
declaration, the normal rule is that the courts must exercise due  care  and
caution to ensure genuineness of the  dying  declaration,  keeping  in  mind
that the accused had no opportunity to test the veracity  of  the  statement
of the deceased by cross-examination.   
As  rightly  observed  by  the  High
Court, 
the law does not insist upon the corroboration of  dying  declaration before it can be accepted.  The  insistence  of  corroboration  to  a  dying declaration is only a rule of prudence.  When the Court  is  satisfied  that
the dying declaration is voluntary, not tainted by  tutoring  or  animosity,
and is not a product of the imagination of the  declarant,  in  that  event,
there is no impediment in convicting the accused on the basis of such  dying
declaration.   
When  there  are  multiple  dying  declarations,  each  dying
declaration  has  to  be  separately  assessed  and  evaluated  and   assess
independently on its own merit as to its evidentiary value  and  one  cannot
be rejected because of certain variation in the other.
13)   We have already noted that in the present case, prosecution relied  on
four dying declarations of the deceased.  We have also  noted  that  at  the
time of  recording  of  these  statements,  medical  officers  on  duty  had
certified that the deceased was fully conscious and was in a  fit  state  of
mind to make the same.  As a matter of fact, the deceased has  given  proper
replies to the questions put to her by various authorities.  Further, it  is
not in dispute that the incident occurred on 05.03.2003  and  she  sustained
54% burns and, ultimately, she died only on  18.04.2003.   In  other  words,
she survived for about 1 ½ (one and a  half)  month  which  speaks  for  the
fitness of the declarant to make a statement.  The persons who recorded  the
four dying declarations were examined as PWs 14, 7 and 6 and they were  also
cross-examined about the statement made by  the  deceased  and  recorded  by
them.  In such circumstances, we fully endorse the  view  expressed  by  the
trial Court and affirmed by the High Court about the acceptability  of  four
dying  declarations  implicating  the   mother-in-law   and   sisters-in-law
(appellants herein).
Oral Evidence of PWs 1, 2 and 11:
14)    Malatabai  (PW-1)  is  the  mother  of  the  deceased  Vandana.   She
explained about the marriage of her daughter and the  strained  relationship
with her family members including the present appellants.  Sanjay  (PW-2)  -
elder brother of the deceased Vandana, in his evidence has  stated  that  he
along with  her  mother  took  the  deceased  to  her  matrimonial  home  on
04.01.2003 and as soon as the deceased entered into the house A-1, A-2,  A-3
and A-5 assaulted her in their  presence.   He  also  stated  that  when  he
protested, they also assaulted him and, thereafter, he informed his  parents
about the same.  In response to this information, his  father  and  maternal
uncle came to the matrimonial home of the deceased but  none  of  them  were
allowed to enter the house to meet the deceased.
15)   PW-11, maternal  uncle  of  the  deceased,  also  narrated  about  the
marriage of the deceased with her husband.  He also said that on receipt  of
information about  the  incident  of  burning,  he  rushed  to  the  Railway
Hospital, Bhusawal and enquired about the deceased. He noticed that  Vandana
sustained burn injuries.  However, she was conscious and he asked her as  to
what had happened.  She disclosed that her mother-in-law and  sisters-in-law
put her on fire.  PW-11 also stated that Vandana was  in  the  Hospital  for
about one and a half month.
16)   Apart from the above witnesses,  prosecution  has  also  examined  the
doctors who certified her fitness while making  the  statement,  the  doctor
who conducted her post-mortem and I.Os.,  who  completed  the  investigation
and filed charge sheet.
Conclusion:
17)   The above analysis clearly shows that the deceased was in a fit  state
of mind to make  dying  declarations  and  her  statements  in  those  dying
declarations are consistent and truthful.  In  addition  to  the  same,  the
prosecution also examined PWs 1, 2 and 11 as well  as  the  Doctors,  I.Os.,
and other witnesses  in  support  of  their  claim.   We  do  not  find  any
infirmity in the order of conviction and  sentence  recorded  by  the  trial
Judge and affirmed by the High Court.
18)   In spite of stringent legislations in order to curb the  deteriorating
condition of women across the country, the cases related to  bride  burning,
cruelty, suicide, sexual harassment, rape, suicide  by  married  women  etc.
have increased and are taking place day by day.
A complete overhaul of  the
system is a must in the form of deterrent punishment for  the  offenders  so
that we can effectively deal  with  the  problem.  
In  the  case  on  hand,
Vandana died within 3 years of her marriage at the instance of  her  mother-in-law and sisters-in-law due to the harassment meted out to her because  of the inability to conceive a child and she was poured kerosene and  burnt  to death.  
Even though, the mother-in-law, who also filed  a  separate  appeal, died  on  10.02.2012,  
in  view  of  clinching  evidence  led  in   by   the
prosecution, there cannot be any leniency in favour of the  appellants,  who are sisters-in-law of the deceased and at whose instance  the  deceased  was burnt at the hands of her mother-in-law.
19)   Accordingly, while agreeing with the  conclusion  arrived  at  by  the
trial Court and affirmed by the High Court, we find no merit in the  appeal.
 Consequently, the same is dismissed.





                            ...…………….…………………………J.


                                 (P. SATHASIVAM)








                            ...…....…………………………………J.


                              (RANJAN GOGOI)



NEW DELHI;
JANUARY 4, 2013.
-----------------------
18