SC cautions against relying blindly on dying declaration
SC says though dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction, it needs to be corroborated by other evidences.
By Sanjay K Singh, TNN |
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court, in a significant ruling on Wednesday, said that though dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction, it needs to be corroborated by other evidence where suspicion surrounds its authenticity.
A bench comprising Justice RV Raveendran and Justice B Sudarshan Reddy said: “It is unsafe to record conviction on the basis of a dying declaration alone in cases where suspicion is raised as regards the correctness of the dying declaration. In such cases, the court may have to look for some corroborative evidence by treating dying declaration only as a piece of evidence.”
Justice Reddy, who wrote the verdict, said, “It is well settled and needs no restatement at our hands that dying declaration can form the sole basis for conviction. But at the same time, due care and caution must be exercised in considering weight to be given to dying declaration in as much as there could be any number of circumstances which may affect the truth.”
The court said further that it is the duty of the prosecution to establish the charge against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The benefit of doubt must always go in favour of the accused. It is true that dying declaration is a substantive piece of evidence to be relied on provided it is proved that the same was voluntary and truthful and the victim was in a fit state of mind.
The apex court set aside a conviction order passed solely on the basis of dying declaration. A sessions court in Guntur had awarded life sentence to the appellant accused, relying upon the dying declaration of the deceased. It was confirmed by the AP High Court subsequently.
Ordering his immediate release provided the accused is not required in connection with any other case, the apex court said in the present case it is difficult to rest the conviction solely on the dying declaration. The deceased sustained as many as 63 injuries. Having regard to the nature of injuries, the deceased may not have been in a position to make any such statement.
According to the prosecution, the deceased, Dasari Srinivasa Rao alias Bujji was an accused in a case relating to the murder of brother of the appellant, Nallapati Sivaiah. On January 5, 1998, three accused — including the appellant — chased the deceased and attacked him with knives when he was returning from Vishnupriya Cinema theatre, Gorantala in Guntur after watching a movie, causing multiple injuries leading to his death. But before the death of the deceased, dying declaration was recorded.
A bench comprising Justice RV Raveendran and Justice B Sudarshan Reddy said: “It is unsafe to record conviction on the basis of a dying declaration alone in cases where suspicion is raised as regards the correctness of the dying declaration. In such cases, the court may have to look for some corroborative evidence by treating dying declaration only as a piece of evidence.”
Justice Reddy, who wrote the verdict, said, “It is well settled and needs no restatement at our hands that dying declaration can form the sole basis for conviction. But at the same time, due care and caution must be exercised in considering weight to be given to dying declaration in as much as there could be any number of circumstances which may affect the truth.”
The court said further that it is the duty of the prosecution to establish the charge against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The benefit of doubt must always go in favour of the accused. It is true that dying declaration is a substantive piece of evidence to be relied on provided it is proved that the same was voluntary and truthful and the victim was in a fit state of mind.
The apex court set aside a conviction order passed solely on the basis of dying declaration. A sessions court in Guntur had awarded life sentence to the appellant accused, relying upon the dying declaration of the deceased. It was confirmed by the AP High Court subsequently.
Ordering his immediate release provided the accused is not required in connection with any other case, the apex court said in the present case it is difficult to rest the conviction solely on the dying declaration. The deceased sustained as many as 63 injuries. Having regard to the nature of injuries, the deceased may not have been in a position to make any such statement.
ADVERTISEMENT
According to the prosecution, the deceased, Dasari Srinivasa Rao alias Bujji was an accused in a case relating to the murder of brother of the appellant, Nallapati Sivaiah. On January 5, 1998, three accused — including the appellant — chased the deceased and attacked him with knives when he was returning from Vishnupriya Cinema theatre, Gorantala in Guntur after watching a movie, causing multiple injuries leading to his death. But before the death of the deceased, dying declaration was recorded.
Download
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
Download
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
ADVERTISEMENT
