Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Smt. Karuna Ramteke, was convicted by the 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Sessions Trial 162 of 2003 for an offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to five years' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000. The conviction was based primarily on a dying declaration (Exh. 23) of the deceased Vaishali, recorded on 4.1.2003 by Smt. Shewantabai Rahate (PW6). The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the conviction. The appellant's counsel argued that the dying declaration was wholly unreliable because it was not in question-answer form, the doctor who endorsed the fitness of the deceased to give the statement was not examined, and the dying declaration bore a left toe impression with clear ridges and curves, which was suspect given that the deceased suffered 17% burns on the left limb and 18% burns on the right limb. The counsel also cited precedents including Shaikh Bakshu & Others v. State of Maharashtra and Abdul Riyaz Abdul Bashir v. State of Maharashtra. The Additional Public Prosecutor conceded that if the dying declaration was excluded, the conviction would be unsustainable, but argued that the declaration was reliable. The High Court, after considering the submissions, found that the dying declaration was not reliable due to the absence of question-answer form, non-examination of the doctor, and the unnatural clarity of the toe impression despite severe burns. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant.
Headnote
A) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Dying declaration must be scrutinized with care; if it is not in question-answer form, the doctor certifying fitness is not examined, and the toe impression appears unnaturally clear despite extensive burns, the declaration is unreliable and cannot sustain conviction. (Paras 3-5) B) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder - Section 304 Part II IPC - Conviction based solely on dying declaration - Where the dying declaration is found to be unreliable, the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC cannot be sustained. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dying declaration Exh. 23 is reliable and can form the sole basis for conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The judgment and order dated 24.8.2004 passed by the 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Sessions Trial 162 of 2003 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II IPC. The bail bonds stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be reliable and trustworthy
- Dying declaration not in question-answer form is suspect
- Non-examination of doctor endorsing fitness raises doubt
- Unnatural clarity of toe impression despite burns indicates fabrication
- Conviction cannot be based solely on unreliable dying declaration
