Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. The trial Court has based its finding on the guilt of the accused on the basis of oral dying declarations made by the deceased before his wife Phulia Bai, daughter Resham Bai, Jhagdu Kotwar, Imrat Kotwar and then to Suresh, his son. These dying declarations are in the form of oral information, as to who had hit him (Bonder), made by Bonder at the same moment one after the other. Bonder succumbed to his injuries within 11/2 hours thereafter. The trial Court found that there was some civil litigation about land between the deceased and the accused persons. Postmortem examination of the deceased on 19-12-1985 at 8 P.M. by Dr. Akbar Ali had revealed the following injuries :-

4. First point to be considered is whether the report made by Suresh to police, recorded as Rojnamcha Sanha No. 1695 (Ex.P.-16), was the first information report or the Dehati Nalishi recorded on the statement of Phulia Bai, later on. Sharda Prasad P.W. 10 was working as Head Constable at Police Station Hoshangabad on 16-12-1985 at 11 p.m. Suresh P.W. I had informed him about the incident that night and he recorded that information in Rojnamcha Sanha No. 1695 (Ex.P-16). Suresh appeared as P.W. 2. On 18- 12-1985, at about 7 p.m., he returned from Hoshangabad and on information received from his Bhanji Prembai, he went to his field and noted that his mother was bringing his father Bonder on a cot. Bonder was put at the house of Kotwar Jhagdu. There, he asked his father as to who had hurt him. His father had told him that Radhey Shyam and Munna had given injuries to him in the field. Even Jhagdu was told the same fact by the father of Suresh. So, he along with Jhagdu, went to Police Station, Hoshangabad, and made a report which was recorded in Rojnamcha Sanha No. 1695. The witness confirmed the report. Then he came back to his house by about 3 a.m. and his father had already died by that time.

12. Now we may go through the evidence of Phulia Bai, Resham Bai, Suresh and Imrat, about what Bonder informed them about the assailants. Imrat is Kotwar and an independent witness. He had no enmity against the accused. So there is no reason why he would speak falsely against them, nor he had any interest in the family of the deceased. He has appeared as P.W. 4. He knows both the parties and the deceased. At about 8 p.m., on the night of the incident, Resham Bai had approached him at his house saying that her father Bonder had been assaulted by Radhey Shyam and Munna. So he went to the house of Jhagdu, Kotwar, where there is a Panchayat Bhavan. Bonder was lying on a cot. He asked Bonder as to who had beaten him. Bonder told him that Radhey Shyam and Munna had assaulted him. So he asked Jhagdu and Suresh to go to the police station to make a report. They went away. Bonder was taken to his (Bonder's) house. Then police had reached there by 3 a.m., but Bonder had died by that time. Cross-examination of this witness does not bring out anything to suggest any infirmity in the evidence or interested ness in the parties. Of course, in previous statement to police, there was no mention that Resham Bai had told him the names of the assailants. She simply told that her father had been assaulted. Police recorded statement of this witness in the same way on 19-12-1985. It was natural for the Kotwar to have asked the injured as to who assaulted him. He has simply stated that Bonder informed him that the assailants were Radhey Shyam and Munna. There appears no reason to doubt the truth of his statement.

13. Now we turn to the evidence of wife, daughter and son of the deceased regarding the reliability of the dying declaration made to them.

14. Phulia Bai, on being informed that Bonder was lying injured near Banyan tree, rushed to the spot along with her daughter Resham Bai. She noted that Bonder was lying under the Banyan tree about 50 paces from the house of Komal. It was natural for her to ask Bonder who had hit him. Bonder's reply was that Radhey Shyam and Munna had assaulted him with Kulhadi and Danda. Then she narrated about taking Bonder on a cot to the house of Jhagdu Kotwar whom also Bonder told the names of his assailants and then Suresh came and learnt from Bonder and Jhagdu about the incident and then Suresh went to the Police Station to report the matter. This later part, that Phulia Bai brought Bonder on a cot to the house of Jhagdu and there Suresh also came and Bonder named the accused as their assailants and also they went to the police station, is fully established by their evidence and the evidence of Sanha report as has already been discussed. So in this part of narration, Phulia Bai is corroborated. Bonder was in a state to talk, there is no doubt about it. This has not been challenged in the medical evidence also. First his close family members had asked Bonder who had caused injuries, so it was natural for Bonder to have named his assailants. There is no reason for him to give false names or conceal the names of his real assailants. So, as it was natural conduct of the injured, the truth of what Bonder told to his wife and daughter, has to be accepted. Similarly, it has to be accepted that Bonder did tell the names of his assailants to his wife and daughter. It is within the scope of natural conduct of the injured. Statement of Resham Bai fully supports the statement of her mother in all respects and is corroborated. No infirmity arises therefrom. Her conduct in carrying Bonder to the house of Jhagdu Kotwar was also natural and is supported by the evidence of Imrat. Suresh appearing as P.W. 2 had learned about the fact that his father was lying outside the house of Jhagdu in an injured condition and he went there and enquired from his father about the assailants and then Bonder gave the names of his assailants as Radheyshyam and Munna. Then he went with Jhagdu Kotwar to police station. His statement is fully corroborated by the fact that he lodged a report. Evidence of this witness appears to be acceptable that Bonder told him that he was assaulted by Radhey Shyam and Munna who are the present accused-appellants.