Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.42 seconds)Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Mehiboobsab Abbasabi Nadaf vs State Of Karnataka on 1 August, 2007
II. In Mehiboobsab Abbasabi Nadaf Vs. State of
Karnataka reported in (2007) 13 SCC 112, the matter
involved four dying declarations, two before the Medical
Officers and one before the Executive Magistrate and one
before the Police Officer. In the dying declarations before
the Medical Officers, the victim had attributed the incident
to have taken place accidentally; before the police she had
accused her husband and in-laws of abusing her and
setting her to fire; while before the Executive Magistrate,
she was stated that her husband had assaulted her with a
broomstick and when she fell down, her in-laws poured
kerosene on her and had set her on fire. She has also
stated that her husband and father-in-law also poured
water on her while her husband brought her to the
hospital. It is in the light of these facts, the Hon'ble Apex
Court held that conviction can indisputably based on a
dying declaration, the same should be reliable and to have
been rendered voluntarily and truthfully - Consistency in
the dying declaration is the relevant factor for placing full
Crl.A.100145/2014
51
reliance thereupon. Observing that in the case before it,
the deceased herself had taken contradictory and
inconsistent stand in different dying declarations, and also
of the fact that the parents-in-law of the deceased had
already been acquitted, the husband who was the
appellant before the Apex Court was held as he was not
alone be held responsible.
Umakant & Anr vs State Of Chhatisgarh on 1 July, 2014
In Umakant and Another Vs. State of
Chhattisgarh reported in (2014) 7 SCC 405, though the
Hon'ble Apex Court was pleased to hold that dying
declaration requires no corroboration as long as it inspires
confidence and is free from tutoring, but at the same time
was also pleased to hold that, if two views are possible in
the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing towards
the guilt of the accused and other towards his innocence,
Crl.A.100145/2014
52
the view which is favourable to the accused should be
adopted.
Section 307 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 32 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Ram Lakhan Singh And Ors vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 6 May, 1977
The above observation would be a guideline in the
case on hand also. At the same time, merely because
Ex.P55 is said to have been recorded by the Taluka
Executive Magistrate, being a higher officer, on
19.10.2010, by that itself it cannot be acceptable ignoring
the other three dying declarations for the reason that the
very same higher officer had also recorded previously i.e.,
on 18.10.2010, a dying declaration of the very same
victim, which in fact is contrary in its contents about the
incident to her subsequent dying declaration at Ex.P55.
Therefore, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in
Lakhan's case (supra), the facts of the case and the
circumstances of the case on hand requires to be
scrutinized very carefully to ascertain which of the
declarations is worth reliance.
Section 174 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
K Ramachandra Reddy & Anr vs The Public Prosecutor on 5 May, 1976
I. In K. Ramachandra Reddy and Anr. Vs. The
Public Prosecutor, reported in 1976 SCR 542, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court while analyzing the scope of
Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act regarding omission
of recording of Magistrate to question the injured
regarding his mental capacity to make statement, was
pleased to observe that, since in that case two views were
reasonably possible, interference with the order of
acquittal was not proper.
1