Skip to main content

Courts role in case of multiple Dying Declaration


If there are more than one dying declarations in a case, the courts should satisfy themselves as to which one reflects the truth, the Supreme has said.

"In cases where there is more than one dying declaration, it is the duty of the court to consider each one of them in their correct perspective and satisfy itself that which one of them reflects the true state of affairs," a bench of justices Abhay Manohar Sapre and Ashok Bhushan said while putting the curtains down in the 27-year-old case.


The observation came in a case in which prosecution had relied on the dying declaration of the victim who in her first two statements had accused her lover of setting her ablaze after she asked him to marry her. In her third statement, she had resiled.

The apex court refused to interfere with the findings of the trial court and the Bombay High Court, which had convicted and sentenced accused Raju Davade by relying on two of the three dying declarations given by the victim who was 18 years of age in 1989.

The apex court refused to interfere with the decisions of the and the trial court, convicting the man and dismissed his appeal.

"We are not inclined to take any different view to one which has been taken by both Sessions Judge and the High Court rejecting the case of the defence that it was a case of accidental death caused by falling of the chimney," the bench said.
Relying on the initial dying declarations of the girl which were recorded on the day of the incident on March 4, 1989, the apex court said, "oral statement of victim was recorded by the police which was followed by recording of dying declaration in which same statement was made by victim implicating accused (Raju) of the crime."

"In the facts and circumstances of the case the conviction has rightly been recorded relying on the (first) dying declaration (the oral statement) of the deceased recorded," it added.

The court also said it has been held in the past that each dying declaration "has to be considered independently on its own merit" and "one cannot be rejected because of the contents of the other".

According to the prosecution, on March 4, 1989, the girl was alone in her house in Mehkar village in Maharashtra and when her family returned, they found her in flames nearby.

She was taken to the rural hospital where she recorded her oral statement in which she alleged that she was having a love affair with the accused who had set her on fire after she requested him to marry her.

The girl, who suffered 72 per cent burns, died five days later and a case under section 302 (murder) was lodged against the accused lover. A sessions court had convicted him and sent him to life imprisonment, which was upheld by the High Court in 2007.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

MACT - Permanent disability - calculate - compensation - Supreme Court - Part 2

1) C. K. Subramonia Iyer vs. T. Kunhikuttan Nair - AIR 1970 SC 376 2) R. D. Hattangadi vs. Pest Control (India) Ltd. - 1995 (1) SCC 551 3) Baker vs. Willoughby - 1970 AC 467 4) Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. - 2010(10) SCALE 298 5) Yadava Kumar v. D.M., National Insurance Co. Ltd. - 2010 (8) SCALE 567) 5. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following : Pecuniary damages (Special Damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure. (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising : (a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment; (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability. (iii) Future medical expenses. Non-pecuniary damages (General Damages) (iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries. (v) Loss of amen

Distinction between “Loss to the Estate” and “Loss of Estate”

A subtle but fundamental distinction between “Loss of Estate” and “Loss to the Estate” was discussed in Omana P.K. and others v. Francis Edwin and others (2011 (4) KLT 952). This Judgment was challenged before the Apex Court, which has now dismissed the Appeal. The question raised in this case, was whether a certain sum which the dependants received as compensation for untimely death of Judgment debtor in a motor accident is attachable in Execution Proceedings. In this case, Justice Thomas P. Joseph speaking for the Kerala High Court had held the following (relying on The Chairman, A.P.S.R.T.C, Hyderabad vs. Smt. Shafiya Khatoon and Others) Capitalized value of the income spent on the dependents, subject to relevant deductions, is the pecuniary loss sustained by the members of his family through his death. The capitalized value of his income, subject to relevant deductions, would be the loss caused to the estate by his death. In other words, what amount the dependents would have got le

Full & Final payment - No dues certificate - end of contract

Whether after the contract comes to an end by completion of the contract work and acceptance of the final bill in full and final satisfaction and after issuance a `No Due Certificate' by the contractor Supreme Court of India Supreme Court of India R.L. Kalathia & Co. vs State Of Gujarat on 14 January, 2011 Author: P Sathasivam Bench: P. Sathasivam, B.S. Chauhan IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3245 OF 2003 R.L. Kalathia & Co Appellant(s) Versus State of Gujarat .... Respondent(s) JUDGMENT P. Sathasivam, J. 1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and final order dated 07.10.2002 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat whereby the High Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.12.1982 passed by the Civil Judge, (S.D.), Jamnagar directing the State Government to pay a sum of Rs.2,27,758/- with costs and interest and dismissed the Civil Suit as well as cross objections filed by the a