Case Note & Summary
The case involves the conviction of Dayaram and Parsu Yadav (appellants) under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for the murder of Ghansu Yadav. The incident occurred on December 19, 1991, when Ghansu, after filing a complaint at Ishanagar Police Station against Dayaram for assaulting his son, was waylaid by both appellants near a canal culvert. They attacked him with lathis, causing severe injuries, and threw his body into the canal, assuming him dead. Ghansu regained consciousness, was rescued by witnesses, and lodged an FIR at the police station, which was treated as his first dying declaration. He later gave a second dying declaration before an Executive Magistrate at the hospital, where he was conscious and oriented. Despite his critical condition, he succumbed to his injuries the same day. The post-mortem revealed multiple fractures and head injuries as the cause of death. The trial court convicted the appellants, relying on the dying declarations and medical evidence, and sentenced them to life imprisonment. The High Court affirmed the conviction. Before the Supreme Court, the appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that the prosecution witnesses turned hostile and the dying declarations were unreliable. The Supreme Court, however, upheld the conviction, noting that the FIR and dying declaration were consistent, recorded while the deceased was conscious, and corroborated by medical evidence. The Court also held that the testimony of hostile witnesses could be relied upon to the extent it was consistent and credible. The appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Evidentiary Value - Section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The deceased's FIR and subsequent dying declaration before Executive Magistrate were consistent and credible, recorded while the deceased was conscious, and corroborated by medical evidence - Held that dying declarations can be sole basis for conviction if found voluntary and truthful (Paras 7-8). B) Criminal Law - Hostile Witness - Testimony of Hostile Witness - Section 154 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Evidence of prosecution witnesses who turned hostile cannot be rejected in toto; their testimony prior to cross-examination can be relied upon if found dependable on careful scrutiny - Held that the substratum of their evidence regarding the deceased's condition and rescue was consistent (Paras 10.4). C) Criminal Law - Murder - Conviction under Section 302 IPC - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - Appellants convicted for causing homicidal death by assaulting deceased with lathis, causing grievous head injuries leading to shock and death - Held that the prosecution proved motive, dying declarations, and medical evidence beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 10.1-10.4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 IPC based on dying declarations and hostile witness testimony is sustainable.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment.
Law Points
- Dying declaration
- admissibility of hostile witness testimony
- conviction under Section 302 IPC
- evidentiary value of FIR as dying declaration
