Case Note & Summary
The present matter involved a reference under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for confirmation of death sentence and a criminal appeal against conviction and sentence. The Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, in Sessions Case No. 81 of 2014, convicted the appellant, Imdad Ali Waid Ali Sayyad, under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced him to death and rigorous imprisonment for three years, respectively. The prosecution case was that the accused was the husband of deceased Shamshad. Matrimonial discord existed between them, and the accused desired that Shamshad transfer her house to his name. He had left the house two to three years prior to the incident, after which Shamshad married one Rafiur Raheman without divorcing the accused. Even thereafter, the accused visited demanding transfer of a half share in the house. On 2 April 2014, between 8:00 and 8:30 p.m., the accused came to Shamshad’s house, picked up a quarrel, and assaulted Shamshad, their daughter Isana, and Shamshad’s mother Harunisa with a knife. Neighbors heard cries and, along with Rafiur, took the injured to the Civil Hospital, Chandrapur. Shamshad and Isana were declared dead, while Harunisa was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit. Shamshad’s son Asil Ali (PW1) was informed by telephone; on arrival, he found the house flooded with blood and then learned of the deaths at the hospital. Harunisa told Asil Ali that the accused had assaulted them with a khanjar. An oral report was lodged, leading to registration of FIR No. 104 of 2014. The investigation included spot panchnama, seizure of incriminating articles, post mortem, and recording of Harunisa’s dying declarations by the police and an Executive Magistrate. The accused was arrested on 13 May 2014, and a knife was recovered at his instance. After committal, the trial court framed charges on 20 September 2014; the accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined ten witnesses and produced documentary evidence. The trial court found the accused guilty and awarded the sentences indicated. In the High Court, the learned counsel for the appellant contended that the prosecution case suffered from serious lacunae. It was argued that PW5, the alleged eye witness, was a stock panch witness and his testimony was unreliable as his statement was recorded belatedly and his blood-stained clothes were not seized. The credibility of the dying declarations (Exh.55 and Exh.69) was challenged on the ground of erasures and lack of doctor’s certification regarding the declarant’s fitness. The non-examination of Rafiur Raheman and the person who informed PW1 was also highlighted. The court was seized of the appeal and the reference for confirmation of death sentence. The extracted portion of the judgment does not contain the final analysis or decision.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability of Dying Declarations Without Doctor's Certification - Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 32 - The defense challenged the dying declarations (Exh.55 and Exh.69) on grounds of erasures and absence of certification by a doctor about the mental and physical condition of the declarant, Harunisa, at the commencement and conclusion of recording. The court considered these contentions while evaluating the prosecution evidence. (Paras 7-8) B) Criminal Law - Evaluation of Eyewitness Testimony - Credibility of Panch Witness as Eyewitness - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The defense argued that PW5, who claimed to have witnessed the assault and transported the injured, was a stock witness for the police as he served as panch on multiple panchnamas and his statement was recorded the next day without seizure of his blood-stained clothes, rendering his testimony unreliable. (Paras 6) C) Criminal Law - Sentencing - Confirmation of Death Sentence - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 366 - The High Court was required to confirm the death sentence imposed by the trial court for the offence of murder under Section 302 IPC, along with the sentence for causing disappearance of evidence under Section 201 IPC. The court examined the entirety of the evidence to determine if the extreme penalty was warranted. (Paras 1)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the prosecution has proved the charge under Sections 302 and 201 IPC beyond reasonable doubt; Whether the dying declarations are admissible and reliable; Whether the testimony of PW5 is credible; Whether the death sentence is warranted
