Date of Judgment:
26th April 2001
Bench:
Umesh C. Banerjee, J.
K.G. Balakrishnan, J.
Parties:
Petitioner– Arvind Singh.
Respondents – The State of Bihar.
Subject
The Hon’ble Supreme Court (hereinafter referred to as ‘Hon’ble Supreme Court’ or ‘the Court’), has held thatthe principle underpinning for dying declaration is that if an individual with first-hand information on a particular matter is unable to appear before the court due to death or any kind of disability, his or her knowledge should be conveyed to the court through some other person. In this particular instance, the Court has stated that the bold interpolated allegations against the accused were ignored by the learned Trial as well as Hon’ble High Court in the wake of charges made U/s. 498A of IPC cannot be sustained and is un-justified on the part of the petitioner.
Legal Provisions
Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Section 120 B – which states the punishment for criminal conspiracy where whosoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offense shall be liable to be punished with death, imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for the term not less than 2 years.
- Section 302 – which states that murder is punishable by death or life imprisonment and the accused shall also be liable to a fine.
- Section 498 A – which states that if a woman’s spouse or relative of her husband exposed her to cruelty, then he along with the family members would be imprisoned for a time that may last up to three years, as well as a fine.
- Section 304B – which states that when a woman dies within seven years of marriage as a result of burns or bodily injury, or if it is revealed that before her marriage, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any other relative of the husband in connection with dowry demand, the woman's death will be regarded as dowry death.
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
- Section 216 – states that any court of law at any given point of time, before the final judgment is pronounced, can add other charges as well and the same shall be informed and explained to the accused in question.
- Section 313 – states that to enable the guilty individually to clarify any situations showing up in the corroboration against him, the Court may at any stage, without initially warning the accused, can ask such questions to him as the Court considers necessary in any inquiry or trial.
BRIEF FACTS
- In this instant petition, where a young girl passed away due to severe bodily burns and subsequently, the husband and the deceased’s in-laws were convicted under respective sections of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life U/s. 304B and 498A/34.
- Additionally, it was observed that the husband Arvind Singh was found guilty of the murder of his wife Minta Devi(deceased) and was subsequently convictedfor her murder U/s. 302 and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
- It was, further, observed by the Court that during the night the appellant along with the other family members had set the deceased daughter/wife on fire and upon further examination of the FIR, it was disclosed that the husband and other family members of the deceased’s family forcibly poured kerosene on her body and lighted her due to which she suffered severe burn injuries.
- Additionally, it was observed that the in-laws were negating to take the deceased daughter to the hospital and on the other hand, the parent family was also persuasive into taking her into their care, the attempt to do so was unsuccessful since the deceased daughter had already succumbed to her injuries.
- The Hon’ble Court after due perusal of the facts and circumstances had ascertained that this was a clear cut case of bride torture and demand of dowry, and since the demand for the dowry was not fulfilled, the family members along with the husband conspired to commit the offense which resulted into the death of the deceased daughter.
- At first the Hon’ble High Court was also uncertain about the evidentiary proof for the demand of dowry because no evidence could be gathered from before the date of the occurrence by the investigating authority; therefore, the Court set aside the conviction and sentence of Janardan Singh, Lilawati Devi and Navin Kumar Singh under Section 304 B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code as also under 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The conviction of 498A of IPC, however, read with Section 34 was confirmed and the bail bonds were granted in favor of the three accused.
- Likewise, for the regards of Arvind Singh(Husband of the deceased), the Court converted his conviction from Section 304B to Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and further, sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life, besides convicting him U/s. 498A to undergo imprisonment for 3 years.
- Subject to the modification of the initial conviction the husband Arvind Singh appealed before this court.
ISSUES RAISED
- Whether thetwo dying declarations can be held to be true and voluntary and can be relied upon or can be excluded from consideration for the infirmities pointed out by Mr. Keswani, appearing for the appellants?
- Whether the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in interfering with the order of acquittal, recorded by the Learned Sessions judge?
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE APPELLANTS
- The Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellants contended that the appointed investigation officer, by making an assumption based on the circumstances of the case, has added an allegationconcerningthe demand of dowry the reasoning behind the same was virtually inserted against the accused and that since the deceased was ugly looking, she used to get tortured by her husband and in-laws to bring dowry.
- Furthermore, learned counsels appearing for the appellant contended that the conversion of the charges meted out U/s 304B to Sec.302 cannot be sustained. He substantiated that the court,which has record findings, is completely aware of the fact that the allegations for demand for dowry were interpolated and subsequently, inserted in the attested FIR.Thus, stating that it would unfair on the part of the appellant to rely on such half-baked information.
- Additionally, learned counsel for the appellants argued that since the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the charges made against the accused were set aside dully by the court; thus, the conviction made U/s. 302 is unfair and not sustainable.
- Also, it was contended that where an offense is meted out U/s.302 of the Indian Penal Code, the charges so framed against the accused should be properly read out to him to avoid prejudice and partial treatment.The evidence brought by the prosecution should also be explained to the accused and not doing so would cause grave injustice to the defense.
- Likewise, the learned counsel contended that the evidence on record and the records do not justify the conversion of charges made against the accused, and such proceeding is entirely errorneous on the part of the law and is unjustified on the part of the appellant.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENTS
- The Counsel appearing on behalf of the state also averred to the fact that the allegation made as to demand of dowry was inserted, subsequently, against the accused but the same cannot be considered as interpolation because of having substantial merit.
- Furthermore, the counsel for the respondents argued that the dying declaration made by the deceased is a piece of solid evidence to hold the husband to be held liable U/s. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution placed heavy reliance on the reports submitted by the medical officer (Dr.K.Vishnupriya) who has averred to the fact that while making a dying declaration to her mother she was in a completely conscious state and has pointed out that her husband, as well as her relatives, were the ones who should be held responsible for her injuries.
- The learned counsel for the respondent substantiated the declaration made without the presence of a doctor where he placed reliance on the case of Mani Ram v. The State of M.P.. In the aforesaid case the court has held that where the declarant was in the hospital itself, there lies a duty with the person who recorded the declarant’s statement should be done in the presence of a medical practitioner itself,further, stating that the above requirement is just mere rules and the validity of the declarations should be tested out by the courts to determine whether the same could be relied upon for future proceedings.
- Furthermore, the learned counsel referred to another case of Ravi Chander v. The State of Punjab, where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has ruled that because the doctor was not examined, the dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate and the dying declaration made orally should not be questioned.
- The Court also stated that the Executive Magistrate is a disinterested witness and a responsible officer, and there is no situation or material on record to suggest that the Executive Magistrate had any animus against the accused or was in any way involved in fabricating the dying declaration, and thus, the question of the genuineness of the dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate does not arise.
- Thus, pleading to uphold the subsequent convictions made by the Hon’ble High Court.
ANALYSIS BY THE COURT
- The Hon’ble Supreme Court has placed reliance on the case of Ram Nath Madhoprasad & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh which was subsequently overruled by a five-Judges judgment in the case of Tarachand Damu Sutar v. the State of Maharashtra.The court stated that “There is no denying that a dying declaration should be treated with care and caution because the maker of the statement cannot be cross-examined.”
- Further, the court observed that the judgment passed by the High Court was not wrong in itself because the mother who was supposedly a witness to the dying declaration and is also an interested party in the present instance, will not discredit the evidence tendered in the court but the Hon’ble Court stated that it would only be sustainable if it is averred by the reports tendered by the doctor.
- Additionally, the court observed that the dying declaration has implicated all four accused similarly, and there is no additional evidence implicating the husband that would allow the High Court to reduce the charges from 304B to 302.
- The Hon’ble Court clearly stated that the issue of the dying declaration to the mother is not worth accepting, and the High Court made a mistake in accepting it.
- Likewise, the Court remarked that empathetic submissions made by the respondents cannot be considered as it has been the rule of law and in any given criminal case, the prosecution has to prove beyond all reasonable doubts that the accused in contention is the one that has committed the act.
- Thus, the court ruled that the conviction and sentence imposed against the accused cannot be sustained and the sentence of life imprisonment was set aside.Furthermore, the charges meted out U/s. 498A also cannot be sustained, upholding that both the learned Trial Court and the High Court were wrong, subsequently, the appeal was allowed.
CONCLUSION
Allowing the appeal the Court ordered the appellants to be acquitted and the court was unable to aver the statement of the declarant in her death bed because the declaration was made without the presence of the concerned doctors. The court, also, reasoned that the two stages of consciousness and a fit state of mind are distinct and not interchangeable. One may be aware but not necessarily in a fit mental state. The lower courts ignored this distinction, thus,the Apex Court upheld the pleadings made by the appellant and subsequently, acquitted them of the charges against them.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
