Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

10 PW-5 Dr. Shrikant Pathak who conducted the post mortem, has specifically stated that deceased Ranjana was examined by her for post mortem and that he found 85 % superficial deep burn injuries. The witness No.5 also did not notice any ink on the thumb or limb of dead body. Thus, creating doubt about the thumb impression appearing on the first dying declaration as well as second dying declaration, which was allegedly recorded immediately before the death of the deceased. The appellants therefore, submits that the same creates doubt regarding dying declaration.

11. The next witness PW-6 ASI Abdul Kalim Ibrahim Raje, recorded the first dying declaration and gave requisition to the Special Judicial Magistrate to record the second dying declaration. The witness states that on 25.3.2017 he gave a letter (Exh.38) to Dr. Supriya Jagtap to examine the patient for recording her dying declaration (Exh.39).

12. PW-7 Dattatray Pawar, who had only registered the FIR on {7} CRAPL 313.19 W 314.19 R.odt the basis of statement (Exh.39) i.e. dying declaration recorded by ASI Rane at Kotwali Police station.

14. PW-9 Ganesh Joshi is the witness, who has recorded second dying declaration of deceased Ranjana. It is submitted that said witness, who is Special Judicial Magistrate has not stated in his deposition that he had read over the contents of dying declaration to deceased Ranjana and thereafter took the thumb impression of the deceased. The counsel for appellant submits that the contents of the dying declaration were not read over to the deceased. Same is one of the important factors to be considered while evaluating the truthfulness and veracity of dying declarations.

29. Details of burn injuries was not given by concerned doctor, who had examined the patient giving fitness certificate before recording {13} CRAPL 313.19 W 314.19 R.odt the dying declaration. This is also a serious flaw in the prosecution case inasmuch as, second dying declaration does not make any mention about the first dying declaration being recorded by the prosecution. CA report are not produced on record and therefore, even though the articles were seized from the spot, there is no corroborative piece of evidence which would lend credence to the veracity of the dying declarations.