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 ...

SARFAESI-Right of tenant/lessee - Supreme Court

Cited: 1)  M/s Trade Well, a Proprietorship Firm, Mumbai & Anr. v. Indian Bank & Anr. [2007 CRI. L.J. 2544]   2)  C.B. Gautam v. Union of India & Ors. [(1993) 1 SCC 78] 3)  ICICI Bank Ltd. v. SIDCO Leathers Ltd. & Ors. [(2006) 10 SCC 452] 4) D elhi High Court in Shri Sanjeev Bansal v. Oman International Bank SAOG & Anr. 131 (2006) DLT 729  5) Madras High Court in Sree Lakshmi Products v. State Bank of India (AIR 2007 Madras 148) 6)  Sunita Jugalkishore Gilda v. Ramalal Udhoji Tanna (dead) through LRs. & Ors. [(2013) 10 SCC 258], Supreme Court 7)  Central Bank of India v. State of Kerala and Others [(2009) 4 SCC 94], Supreme Court  8) Authorised Officer, Indian Overseas Bank and Another v. Ashok Saw Mill [(2009) 8 SCC 366] , Supreme Court 9) United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon & Others [(2010) 8 SCC 110] , Supreme Court   10)  Oriental Bank of Commerce in Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. (C) ...

An order of attachment before judgment ends if a suit is dismissed

An order of attachment before judgment passed under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code will not survive the dismissal of a suit and it ends when the suit is dismissed after trial. Contents 1 (i) Whether an order of attachment before judgment under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“the Code”, for short) made in a suit for recovery of money will survive the dismissal of the suit on merits? 2 (ii) If the appellate court reverses the decree of the trial court and allows the suit claim, will it result in an automatic revival of the order of attachment before judgment? 3 (iii) Whether the ratio in the decision by Full Bench in Thampi Muhammad Abdul Kadir v. Padmanabha Pillai Parameswaran Pillai (1952 KLT 264) holds good in view of the change in the precedential law and insertion of Order XXXVIII Rule 11A to the Code? 3.1 “11A. Provisions applicable to attachment.- 3.2 “57. Determination of attachment.- 3.3 Arumuhom Ammal v. Nayanar Panicker (1962 KLT 264) 3.4...