GHULAM HUSSAIN AND ANR. versus STATE OF DELHI

Citation: [2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 141 · Decided: 04-08-2000 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.T. THOMAS · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

GHULAM HUSSAIN AND ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF DELHI 
AUGUST 4, 2000 
[K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] 
Evidence Act, 1872-Section 32-Dying declaration-Admissibility of-
Held. on facts, dying declaration is corroborated by material facts and 
therefore valid-Penal Code, 1860-Section 302. 
Deceased died on account of burn injuries. The statement of the 
deceased was recorded by Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police (ASI) at the 
hospital. Magistrate also recorded the statement of the deceased separately. 
The deceased stated that he had strained marital relations with his wife; 
his wife went to her father's house; he went there to take his wife back; 
on refusal by his father-in-law, the deceased slept in a tea shop situated 
in a corner of the house for three days; next day very early In the morning 
he was woken up from sleep; his co-brother held both his hands from 
behind; his father-in-law asked the wife of the deceased to bring kerosene; 
she brought kerosene in a container and gave it to her father; he poured 
the kerosene on his son-in-law forcibly; and was set ablaze by the brother-
in-law of the deceased. The statements of the deceased were treated as 
dying declarations after his death. The Additional Sessions Judge convicted 
the wife, father-in-law, brother-in-law and co-brother of the deceased 
under Section 302 IPC and sentenced them to imprisonment for life with 
a fine of Rs. 500 each. The High Court dismissed the appeals of all the 
ac~used. It, however, rejected the dying declaration recorded by the 
Magistrate on the ground that the prosecution has failed to fully establish 
the recording of it. 
In appeal to this Court, the accused-appellants contended that the 
.dying declaration of the deceased was not corroborated by any other 
evidence; that the dying declaration was recorded in suspicious circumstances 
which cannot be held to have been proved; that the statement of the 
deceased was recorded by investigating officer which was subsequently 
treated as First Information Report (FIR) and, therefore, the same could 
not be treated as dying declaration admissible in evidence. 
141 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
G 
H 
142 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
The prosecution contended that the dyinjl declarations have been 
duly recorded and the material facts are corroborated by other evidence. 
Disposing of the appeals, the Court 
HELD 1.1. Section 32 of the Evidence Act, 1872 is an exception to the 
B 
general rule of exclusion of hearsay evidence and the statement made by a 
person written or verbal of relevant facts, after the death of the person, is 
admissible in evidence if it refers to the cause of the death or any 
circumstances of the transactions which resulted in death. It cannot, however, 
be said that the statement recorded by the investigating officer which was 
treated as FIR later could not be treated as dying declaration and 
C 
inadmissible in evidence, because at the time of recording the statement the 
ASI did not possess the capacity of an investigating officer as the investigation 
had not commenced by then. Such a statement can be treated as a dying 
declaration which is admissible in evidence under Section 32(1) of the Act. 
The statement was voluntarily made by the deceased which was reduced to 
D 
writing and have rightly been treated as dying declaration after the death of 
the maker. The deceased has referred to the circumstances which ultimately 
proved to be the cause of his death. Nothing has been pointed out by the 
appellants which could create any doubt regarding the making or 
admissibility in evidence of the statement. [146-C; 145-H; 146-A-B; D-E] 
E 
1.2. The High Court is right in rejecting the dying declaration recorded 
by the Magistrate on the ground that the prosecution has failed to fully 
establish the recording of the statement. [147-C] 
1.3. On close scrutiny it is seen that the dying declaration of the ASI 
is the truthful version of the occurrence which narrates the circumstances 
F 
leading to the death of its maker. As the said statement was made immediately 
after the occurrence, there is no reason doubt its veracity and correctness. 
The circumstances surrounding the dying declaration are clear and 
convincing which is found to be corroborated in material particulars. [148-
H; 149-A] 
G 
Khushan Rao v. Stale of Bombay, [1958] SCR 552; Munna Raja v. State 
of Madhya Pradesh, [1976] 2 SCC 764, relied on. 
2. The wife of the deceased could not have held a commo

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.