By PTI
NEW DELHI: A dying declaration will be the only real foundation for recording a conviction and a court docket is required to look at whether or not it’s true and dependable, the Supreme Court Tuesday stated.
The high court docket additionally stated {that a} court docket also needs to study whether or not the dying declaration has been given when the deceased was bodily and mentally match to make the declaration and was not underneath any tutoring or duress.
In case there are a number of dying declarations and there are inconsistencies between them, the dying declaration recorded by the upper officer like a Magistrate will be relied upon, it stated.
The apex court docket, nonetheless, stated that is with the situation that there isn’t any circumstance giving rise to any suspicion about its truthfulness.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and P S Narasimha made the observations whereas acquitting a person convicted underneath Section 304-B (dowry dying) of the Indian Penal Code.
“Court is required to examine as to whether the dying declaration is true and reliable; as to whether it has been recorded by a person at a time when the deceased was fit physically and mentally to make the declaration; as to whether it has been made under any tutoring/duress/prompting.”
“The dying declaration can be the sole basis for recording conviction and if it is found reliable and trustworthy, no corroboration is required. In case there are multiple dying declarations and there are inconsistencies between them, the dying declaration recorded by the higher officer like a Magistrate can be relied upon,” the bench stated.
“In case there are circumstances wherein the declaration has not been found to be made voluntarily and is not supported by any other evidence, the Court is required to scrutinize the facts of an individual case very carefully and take a decision as to which of the declarations is worth reliance,” the bench stated.
The high court docket was listening to an enchantment filed by a person difficult an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which decreased his sentence awarded from 10 years to seven years however concurred with the judgement and order of conviction by the trial court docket in offence punishable underneath Section 304B of the IPC.
In the moment case, the deceased had given two dying declarations.
In the primary one, the lady had stated that she consumed a toxic medication by mistake.
While within the second dying declaration, the deceased stated that her husband, in addition to his mother and father, administered the toxic substance to her.
The high court docket stated within the current case, it was confronted with two dying declarations, that are completely inconsistent and contradictory to one another.
It famous that the second declaration was recorded with out there being examined by a health care provider in regards to the health of the deceased to make the assertion.
The apex court docket stated the daddy and sister of the deceased have been current within the hospital on the time of the second dying declaration.
“The possibility of the second dying declaration being given after tutoring by her relatives cannot, therefore, be ruled out,” the bench stated.
“We, therefore, find that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the first dying declaration will have to be considered to be more reliable and trustworthy as against the second one.”
“In any case, the benefit of the doubt which has been given to the other accused by the trial court, ought to have been equally given to the present appellant when the evidence was totally identical against all the three accused,” the apex court docket stated whereas acquitting the husband.
NEW DELHI: A dying declaration will be the only real foundation for recording a conviction and a court docket is required to look at whether or not it’s true and dependable, the Supreme Court Tuesday stated.
The high court docket additionally stated {that a} court docket also needs to study whether or not the dying declaration has been given when the deceased was bodily and mentally match to make the declaration and was not underneath any tutoring or duress.
In case there are a number of dying declarations and there are inconsistencies between them, the dying declaration recorded by the upper officer like a Magistrate will be relied upon, it stated.
The apex court docket, nonetheless, stated that is with the situation that there isn’t any circumstance giving rise to any suspicion about its truthfulness.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and P S Narasimha made the observations whereas acquitting a person convicted underneath Section 304-B (dowry dying) of the Indian Penal Code.
“Court is required to examine as to whether the dying declaration is true and reliable; as to whether it has been recorded by a person at a time when the deceased was fit physically and mentally to make the declaration; as to whether it has been made under any tutoring/duress/prompting.”
“The dying declaration can be the sole basis for recording conviction and if it is found reliable and trustworthy, no corroboration is required. In case there are multiple dying declarations and there are inconsistencies between them, the dying declaration recorded by the higher officer like a Magistrate can be relied upon,” the bench stated.
“In case there are circumstances wherein the declaration has not been found to be made voluntarily and is not supported by any other evidence, the Court is required to scrutinize the facts of an individual case very carefully and take a decision as to which of the declarations is worth reliance,” the bench stated.
The high court docket was listening to an enchantment filed by a person difficult an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which decreased his sentence awarded from 10 years to seven years however concurred with the judgement and order of conviction by the trial court docket in offence punishable underneath Section 304B of the IPC.
In the moment case, the deceased had given two dying declarations.
In the primary one, the lady had stated that she consumed a toxic medication by mistake.
While within the second dying declaration, the deceased stated that her husband, in addition to his mother and father, administered the toxic substance to her.
The high court docket stated within the current case, it was confronted with two dying declarations, that are completely inconsistent and contradictory to one another.
It famous that the second declaration was recorded with out there being examined by a health care provider in regards to the health of the deceased to make the assertion.
The apex court docket stated the daddy and sister of the deceased have been current within the hospital on the time of the second dying declaration.
“The possibility of the second dying declaration being given after tutoring by her relatives cannot, therefore, be ruled out,” the bench stated.
“We, therefore, find that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the first dying declaration will have to be considered to be more reliable and trustworthy as against the second one.”
“In any case, the benefit of the doubt which has been given to the other accused by the trial court, ought to have been equally given to the present appellant when the evidence was totally identical against all the three accused,” the apex court docket stated whereas acquitting the husband.
