Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: sole dying declaration in Susheela Bai @ Halki vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 April, 2022Matching Fragments
20.3. In Thurukanni Pompiah, this Court held that while a truthful and reliable dying declaration may form the sole basis of conviction, even without corroboration but the Court must be satisfied about its truthfulness and reliability; and if the Court finds that the declaration is not wholly reliable and a material portion of the deceased's version of the occurrence is untrue, the Court may, in the circumstances of a given case, may consider it unsafe to convict the accused on the basis of the declaration alone without further corroboration. This Court observed, inter alia, as under: (AIR p. 941, para 9) "9. Under clause (1) of Section 32 of the Evidence Act, 1872, a statement made by a person who is dead, as to the cause of his death or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death is a relevant fact in cases in which the cause of that person's death comes into question, and such a statement is relevant whether the person who made it was or was not, at the time when it was made, under expectation of death, and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question. The dying declaration of Eranna is, therefore, relevant and material evidence in the case. A truthful and reliable dying declaration may form the sole basis of conviction, even though it is not corroborated. But the Court must be satisfied that the declaration is truthful. The reliability of the declaration should be subjected to a close scrutiny, considering that it was made in the absence of the accused who had no opportunity to test its veracity by cross-examination. If the Court finds that the declaration is not wholly reliable and a material and integral portion of the deceased's version of the entire occurrence is untrue, the Rajaram & Ors. Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No. 148 of 2011) Santi Bai Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No. 245 of 2011) Susheela Bai @ Halki Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No. 185 of 2016) Court may, in all the circumstances of the case, consider it unsafe to convict the accused on the basis of the declaration alone without further corroboration."
47. It is submitted by the Counsel for the Appellants that where the case is based on sole circumstance of dying declaration then the recording of conviction is not safe.
48. Considered the submissions made by the Counsel for the Appellant.
49. The Supreme Court in the case of Madan Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2019) 13 SCC 464 has held as under :
11. We are aware of the fact that the physical or mental weakness consequent upon the approach of death, a desire of self-vindication, or a disposition to impute the responsibility for a wrong to another, as well as the fact that the declarations are made in the absence of the accused, and often in response to leading questions and direct suggestions, and with no opportunity for cross-
examination: all these considerations conspire to render such declarations a dangerous kind of evidence. In order to ameliorate such concerns, this Court has cautioned in umpteen number of cases to have a cautious approach when Rajaram & Ors. Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No. 148 of 2011) Santi Bai Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No. 245 of 2011) Susheela Bai @ Halki Vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No. 185 of 2016) considering a conviction solely based on dying declaration. Although there is no absolute rule of law that the dying declaration cannot form the sole basis for conviction unless it is corroborated, the courts must be cautious and must rely on the same if it inspires confidence in the mind of the Court [see: Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar and Suresh Chandra Jana v. State of W.B.].
(x) If after careful scrutiny, the court is satisfied that it is true and free from any effort to induce the deceased to make a false statement and if it is coherent and consistent, there shall be no legal impediment to make it the basis of conviction, even if there is no corroboration."
177. It is well settled that dying declaration can form the sole basis of conviction provided that it is free from infirmities and satisfies various other tests. In a case where there are more than one dying declaration, if some inconsistencies are noticed between one and the other, the court has to examine the nature of inconsistencies as to whether they are material or not. The court has to examine the contents of the dying declarations in the light of the various surrounding facts and circumstances.