Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.23 seconds)Jaishree Anant Khandekar vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 March, 2009
Dr. Sandeep Gupta who had certified about the fitness of Ashok
Kumar to make the statement has also been examined as PW-1, wherein he
had stated that the statement of Ashok Kumar was recorded in his presence
by the learned Judicial Magistrate. As regards the submission that the
deceased had sustained 100% burn injuries and had been given painkillers
which may render him unfit to be in a concious state of mind, we are of the
view that in the light of clinching evidence in the form of PW-1 one cannot
doubt the mental capacity of the deceased to make the statement. Reference
may be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
Jaishree Anant Khandekar Vs. State of Maharashtra 2009 (11) SCC 647
wherein victim had suffered severe burn injuries which were estimated at
100%. The dying declration was relied upon although the victim remained
alive for 15 days thereafter. The Doctor had cerified that the declarant was
fully concious to make the declaration.
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Rafique @ Rauf & Ors vs State Of U.P on 2 July, 2013
We are of the view that there is no basis in the submission of
the learned counsel that the dying declaration should not have been relied
MOHAN SINGH
2014.12.11 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Criminal Appeal No. D-754-DB of 2002 #8#
upon. The principles which have to be followed while testing the dying
declaration have been laid down in the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India in case titled as Rafique v. State of U.P., (2013) 12 SCC 121. and
the relevant paragraphs are reproduced hereunder:
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 164 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
1