Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

PW-20 Ghanshyam Singh SI (Incharge PP Roun Domail, IO of part investigation who secured written permission from doctor in GMC Jammu to record the statement of the victim) on 17.08.2015 in examination-in-chief by Ld. PP, has stated that the investigation of FIR No. 67/2013 under sections 307/34 RPC was handed over to him on 18th of March 2013 after the transfer of the first IO. Padam Dev Singh S.I who was also Incharge Police Post Roun Domail. During his investigation on 21st of March 2013 he had visited Government Medical College, Jammu and recorded the statement of the victim/injured in the Hospital in presence of an Executive Magistrate and on 24th of March, 2013 he had deputed PSI Lakhveer Singh for depositing the seized material in FSL Jammu, and on 26th of March 2016 an information was received in Police Post Roun Domail that the victim has succumbed to burn injuries, and on receipt of this information, the offence under section 302 RPC was added, and thereafter the post-mortem of dead body of the deceased Vandana Sharma was got conducted by Medical Officer in Government Medical College, Jammu and after post-mortem the dead body was handed over to her NOK. That the statements of some witnesses under section 161 Cr. PC were also recorded. In cross-examination has stated that the statement of PW Dhani Ram under section 161 Cr. P. C bears his Signatures but he has not scribed this statement and similarly the statement of Satpal under section 161 Cr.PC also bears his signatures but it is not scribed by him although the statement of Pw- Rajeev Kumar is in his hand writing. That he does not remember who had scribed the statements of PW Satpal and Dhani Ram nor the CD file reflects the scribe of these statements. That the investigation was handed over to him on 18 th of March, 2013. That the letter through which he had requisitioned the services of a Naib Tehsildar for presence in the Hospital for recording the statement of the victim, is not annexed with the file. That he had addressed this letter to District Magistrate Udhampur who had written a letter to District Magistrate Jammu who had deputed a Naib Tehsildar to the Hospital. That he had received a telephonic call from his Office that the Naib Tehsildar has been deputed for Government Medical College Jammu and he should also proceed to Government Medical College Jammu. That on reaching the Government Medical College Jammu he had not made any report in the Roznamcha of the Police Station Bakshi Nagar. That after recording the statement of the victim on 21st of March, 2013, it was signed by her father PW-Dhani Ram and husband Satpal, and this statement was scribed by Parshotam Singh under his supervision who had accompanied him. That before recording her statement, the fitness certificate was also obtained from the doctor. That the investigation of this case remained with him only for 9/10 days because he was also transferred. That the dying declaration of thedeceased is also signed by the Executive Magistrate.

(iii) Motive; evidence of PW-1 Sat Pal (husband of deceased) to the effect that his deceased wife had illicit relations with PW-6 Naresh Kumar (brother-in-law of deceased) & evidence of PW-2 Dhani Ram (f/o deceased) to the effect that there was dispute existing between the deceased and accused persons relating to landed property/house;

8. The1st circumstance relied by the prosecution against the appellants/convict is, Dying Declarations of deceased Vandna Sharma dated 14-03-2013 (EXT-P2/I) & dated 21-03-2013 (EXT-P15) and the 2nd circumstance of medical evidence are intertwined, therefore, both of these circumstances are being decided jointly. Before we advert to the actual admissibility and credibility of the two dying declarations aforesaid, it would be beneficial to brace ourself to the facts of the prosecution story. The prosecution story as unfolded in the charge sheet is, "that on 12-03-2013 an information was received in police post Roun Domail Udhampur to the effect that a lady Mst. Vandna Sharma w/o Sat Pal R/O Village Battal Balian Khambi Thill has received serious burn injuries in her matrimonial home and has been admitted in District Hospital Udhampur for treatment, and the cause of injuries is to be ascertained. On this information, PW-10 Mohd Ayoob Head Constable was deputed to record her statement and vide docket EXTP-10 opinion of the attending doctor regarding fitness of injured to make statement as well as permission to record it was sought, but the medical officer attending her opined that she was not fit to make statement, whereafter, she was shifted to GMC Jammu for specialized treatment in view of her critical burn injuries condition. This information was conveyed by the said HC to police post concerned and thereafter the said HC on directions of his superior officers rushed to the place of occurrence and found a plastic bottle containing 350 ml Kerosene oil and a matchbox lying inside the room which was locked by him to preserve the evidence, and he also saw burnt clothes lying in the compound of house which were also kept in safe condition, and on his return to police post in the evening, he handed over the keys to Incharge police post. Thereafter, vide report No. 14 Roznamcha dated 12-03-2013 PW-8 Head Constable Parshotam Singh No. 189/U was deputed to GMC Jammu for recording the statement of the above named lady to ascertain the cause of burn injuries. The said Head Constable after recording the statement of Mst. Vandna Devi w/o Sat Pal caste Brahmin R/O Battalbalian Khambi in GMC Jammu returned to police post Roun Domail and presented the said statement to Incharge police for further action, and the return entry of the said HC was made in Roznamcha dated 14-03-2013 vide report No. 18. In her statement EXTP-2/I dated 14-03-2013 Mst. Vandna Devi the alleged victim stated that on 12-03-2013 between 12 to 12.15 pm she was watching TV in her matrimonial home when her devar (brother-in-law) Sohan Singh & her father-in-law Gian Chand came into her room and started hurling filthy abuses upon her, and when she requested them not to do so, her father-in-law caught hold of her, and her devar Sohan Lal sprinkled kerosene oil upon her body and set her on fire. That on catching the fire she rushed out of her room whereupon some of her neighbourers came to the scene of occurrence and tried to extinguish the fire. Her husband was also informed by someone through a telephonic call about the alleged occurrence and he also rushed back to his home and shifted her to Udhampur Hospital in a vehicle for treatment, whereas, wife of her devar (devrani) Mst. Usha who was present at the scene of occurrence remained a mute spectator and did not intervene nor made any attempt to rescue her. Her three children had gone out for attending Anganwari School and they also rushed back on hearing her cries. This statement was witnessed by her father namely Dhani Ram & her husband Sat Pal." The said statement of deceased prima-facie disclosed the commission of cognizable offence u/s 307/34 RPC against the accused persons, therefore, a copy of aforesaid Roznamcha report mark-A was forwarded to police station Udhampur through HC Mohinder Singh No. 81/U of PP Roun Domail for registration of case, whereby, FIR No. 67/2013 u/s 307/34 RPC was registered and investigation was carried out initially by PW-19 SI Padam Dev Singh (officer Incharge Roun Domail Udhampur) and on his transfer, the said investigation was assigned to PW-20 Ghanshyam Singh and on his transfer to PW-22 Rajesh Angral and finally to PW-23 Amira Naseem Dy.SP (Prob.). On 14-03-2013 Incharge PP Roun Domail PW-19 Padam Dev Singh with PWs 8 & 10 HC Parshotam Singh & HC Mohd Yaqoob visited place of occurrence, seized articles reflected in seizure memos EXT-P9/I from the place of occurrence, and thereafter, the above named I.O during investigation apart from recording the statements of other prosecution witnesses u/s 161 Cr.pc, on 21-03-2013 also visited GMC Jammu and sought opinion of attending doctor PW-18 Dr. Somafy regarding fitness of the victim to record her statement who was declared fit by the doctor, thereafter, the 2nd statement of the victim/deceased in presence of EMIC Jammu u/s 161 Cr.pc was recorded which was attested by the EMIC Jammu. On 26-03-2013 victim/deceased reportedly succumbed to her burn injuries whereupon the commission of offence was finally made out against accused persons which led to conversion of offence u/s 307 into offence u/s 302/34 RPC. The dead body of the deceased was handed over to her legal heirs after it‟s postmortem for cremation and the accused were arrested on 15-03-2013. We may hasten to add that while there is huge wealth of case law and incredible jurisprudential contribution by Hon‟ble Apex Court on the subject of the admissibility and credibility of dying declaration, we are consciously referring to few decisions from para 14 of the judgment relied upon by Ld. Counsel for appellants reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 2399 [Jayamma & another Vs State of Karnataka] which are closer to the facts of the case in hand.

It goes without saying that when the dying declaration has been recorded in accordance with law, and it gives a cogent and plausible explanation of the occurrence, the Court can rely upon it as the solitary piece of evidence to convict the accused. It is for this reason that Section 32 of the Evidence Act, 1872 is an exception to the general rule against the admissibility of hearsay evidence and its Clause (1) makes the statement of the decease admissible. Such statement, classified as a "dying declaration" is made by a person as to the cause of his death or as to the injuries which culminated to his death or the circumstances under which injuries were inflicted. A dying declaration is thus admitted in evidence on the premise that the anticipation of brewing death breeds the same human feelings as that of a conscientious and guiltless person under oath. It is a statement comprising of last words of a person before his death which are presumed to be truthful and not infected by any motive or malice. The dying declaration is, therefore, admissible in evidence on the principle of necessity as there is very little hope of survival of the maker, and if found reliable, it can certainly form the basis for conviction. As per the prosecution case, deceased Vandna Sharma has made two dying declarations dated 14-03-2013 & 21-03-2013 (EXT-P2/I & EXT-P15) respectively recorded by PW-8 Parshotam Singh HC No. 189/U & I/O PW- 20 Ghanshyam Singh SI the then Incharge police post Roun Domail Udhampur in Govt. Medical College Jammu. On the basis of the 1st statement recorded on 14-03-2013 FIR No. 67/2013 came to be registered against accused persons u/s 307/34 RPC which on the death of deceased on 26-03- 2013 in GMC Jammu got converted into offence u/s 302 RPC. The 1st statement of deceased dated 14-03-2013 was recorded by PW-8 Parshotam Singh HC No. 189/U after the deceased was declared fit by PW-17 Dr. Gopal Sharma of GMC Jammu vide his endorsement made on the docket EXT-P17. It is undisputed that deceased Vandna Sharma after suffering burn injuries at the hands of appellants/convict survived for 14 days from the date of occurrence of 12-03-2013 till 26-03-2013 and her death ultimately occurred as per the medical opinion due to septicemia as a result of infected flame burns involving 95% of the body surface. PW-16 Dr. Deepa Hans (MO GMC Jammu, witness to postmortem report) has categorically stated that the deceased was having 96% of burns all over the body and she died due to septicemia. PW-17 Dr. Gopal Sharma in his deposition has deposed, that on 14-03-2013 he examined the patient Vandna Sharma and found her fit, conscious and co-operative, orientated to time, place and person, she was speaking and was fit to give statement. Therefore, from the depositions of aforesaid Medical Officers the physical and mental fitness of the deceased to make the aforesaid two statements/dying declarations stands firmly established living no room for any doubt. In regard to 1st dying declaration dated 14-03-2013 (EXT-P2/I) victim/deceased Vandna Sharma has stated as under:-

It is trite law that though the false explanation cannot be taken to complete a missing link in the chain of circumstances, it can surely be taken to fortify the conclusion of conviction recorded on the basis of the proven incriminating circumstances. We find that the non-explanation of the circumstances would fortify the finding, which is based on the chain of incriminating circumstances that leads to no other conclusion than the guilt of the appellant.

13. After churning the entire prosecution evidence once again by us being the First Court of Appeal, we are of the considered view, that the prosecution has been able to prove the charge punishable u/s 302/34 RPC against appellants beyond any reasonable doubt, and therefore, their conviction for the said charge deserve to be upheld. The net result now surfaces is, that instant appeal stands dismissed, while the conviction and sentence rendered by the trial court for commission of offence u/s 302/34 RPC against appellants/convict stands upheld and confirmed. Confirmation Cr. Ref. No.1199/PDSJU dated 09-10-2018 is answered accordingly. Registry to send the record to the concerned trial court alongwith copy of the judgment. Jail Superintendent where the appellants have been presently lodged be also informed of the outcome of the appeal.