LexCHIRRA SHIVRAJ versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[201'0] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 673 CHIRRA SHIVRAJ v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Criminal Appeal No. 514 of 2010) NOVEMBER 26, 2010 [P. SATHASIVAM AND ANIL R. DAVE, JJ.] A B Penal Code, 1860 - s. 304 Part fl - Death due to burn injuries - Deceased had strained family relations with the accused-appellant, her brother-in-law - She made a dying C declaration before a Judicial Officer - Conviction by courts· below on the sole basis of the dying declaration - Justification of - Held: Justified - The dying declaration was trustworthy and reliable and it was supported by the complaint - The declaration was scrupulously recorded by the Judicial Officer D who had found the deceased to be conscious and fit to make statement - In the circumstances of the case, merely because a second FIR was filed, it cannot be stated that the entire investigation was defective and that should result into acquittal · of the accused - The first FIR was recorded on the basis of E the statement made by the deceased when she was alive and upon her death, which had nexus with her burn injuries, further information was given and that was recorded as a second FIR - The second FIR did not make the case of the prosecution weak especially when no prejudice had been caused to the F accused-appellant or any other person because of the aforestated further information with regard to the death being recorded as a new FIR - A/so, no a/legation was made to the effect that the contents of the second FIR were incorrect or malicious or there was any oblique motive - Besides, there G was no fresh investigation in pursuance of the second FIR - FIR - Second FIR. Evidence/Act, 1872 - s. 32 - Dying declaration - Appreciation of - Held: If dying declaration is trustworthy and 673 · H 674 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A if it can be shown that the person making the statement was not influenced by any exterior factor and made the statement which was duly recorded, it can be made basis for conviction. The deceased had strained family relations with her 8 brother-in-law, the appellant. According to the prosecution, the appellant used to regularly abuse the deceased and one day, as usual, when the deceased was being abused by the anpellant, she poured kerosene on herself anJ thereafter the appellant hurled a lighted match stick on her, because of which she was In flames and was C severely burnt. The deceased was brought to the hospital by her husband. PW11, the Assistant Sub Inspector recorded the statement of the deceased at the hospital. FIR was filed D on the basis of the statement made by the deceased against the appellant for commission of offence under Section 307 IPC. Looking to the nature of burn injuries suffered by the deceased, her dying declaration was recorded by PW10, First Class Judicial Magistrate. E Because of the burn injuries, the deceased suffered from septicemia and as a result thereof she died. Therefore, the appellant was also charged under Section 302, IPC. At the time of the trial, most of the witnesses, who were family members of the deceased as well as the F appellant, turned hostile. However, on the basis of the dying declaration (Ext.P.12), which supported the contents of the FIR filed by the complainant, the trial court convicted the appellant under Section 304 Part II, IPC and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for five G years. The High Court confirmed the order of conviction. In the instant appeal, the appellant contended that the trial court had erred in convicting the appellant only on the basis of the dying declaration. He also contended H that though investigation in the case was mad1> under the ' CHIRRA SHIVRAJ v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH 675 first FIR, ultimately the order, of conviction was passed in A pursuance of t~e second FIR, which was bad in law. Di!?nlissina the ,appeal, the Court v ,. ' \ . . ' ' ' . · HE'LE>:1. Tll~ order passed by the High Court confirm•ng the order of conviction passed by the trial 8 court cannot be said to be bad in law. The trial court had duly considered the fact that the dying declaration was trustworthy ~nd reliable and it was supported by the complaint and as a result th~reof~ the order of conviction was al~o confirmed by the High c'ourt. [Para 11] [681 ·C] C . ' \ 2. 'If dyin'g declaration is trustworthy and .if it can be shown that the person ·making the statement was not influenced by
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.