HEERALAL YADAV versus STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 147 · Decided: 04-07-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: H.K. SEMA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

HEERALAL Y ADA V 
A 
v. 
STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. 
JULY 4, 2006 
[H.K. SEMA AND A.K. MATHUR, JJ.] 
B 
Criminal Law : 
Evidence-Dying declaration-Recorded by doctor-Veracity of-High 
Court setting aside conviction of accused uls 302134 !PC solely on the ground C 
that dying declaration did not inspire confidence-Held, High Court did not . 
discuss veracity and creditworthiness of dying declaration and testimony of 
doctor recording it-As regards the effect of excessive hemorrhage, High 
Court was grossly oblivious to the statement of the doctor recording dying 
declaration that victim recovered consciousness after medication and was fit 
for recording of his dying declaration-Dying declaration being well D 
corroborated with other attending .circumstances inspires confidence-High 
Court committed grave miscarriage of justice by reversing conviction recorded 
by trial court-Judgment of High Court set aside and that of trial court 
restored-Penal Code-Section 302134-Medical Jurispruden~l--Excessive 
hemorrhage. 
E 
Complainant by the present appeal challenged the judgment of the 
High Court setting aside conviction of the three accused-respondents u/s 
302/34 IPC, as recorded by the trial court, on the sole ground that the 
dying declaration did .not inspire confidence. The High Court rejected the 
dying declaration recorded by the doctor (P.W.1) mainly on the grounds 
that therein the deceased did not mention that his son (P.W.3) was present F 
with him at the scene of occurrence; that according to the nature of the 
injuries sustained by the deceased and the post-mortem report, due to 
excessive hemorrhage, the deceased might have gone in shock within half 
an hour of the incident and the doctor did not state that the deceased was 
in a fit mental condition to give dying declaration and throughout G 
remained conscious during recording of his statement. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. Presence or non-presence of PW-3 at the scene of 
occurrence or for that matter non-mentioning of the name of PW-3 in the 
I~ 
H 
148 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A dying declaration has no connection with ascertainment of the veracity 
and creditworthiness of the dying declaration. In fact the High Court did 
not discuss the veracity and creditworthiness of either the dying 
declaration recorded by the doctor or his testimony as PW-1, deposed 
before the Court. (152-F-G] 
B 
1.2. The High Court was grossly oblivious to the statement of the 
Doctor (P.W.1) when he said that the deceased must have gone in shock 
at the place of incident but he recovered consciousness as he was given 
glucose saline and medicin~:s. Ex.P-3 is the requisition dated 14.4.1993 
sought by the Investigating Officer regarding the condition of the deceased 
C for recording dying declaration. There is an endorsement in Ex.P-3 by 
P.W.1, the Medical Officer, Primary Health Center that the deceased 
would be able to give the statement of dying declaration. Answering the 
questions, the deceased clearly stated the names of the accused-respondents 
as his assailants, the arms with which he was assaulted and the place where 
he was assaulted. The deceased also stated that he was giving the statement 
D in full consciousness. He also stated that the dying declaration was not 
under any pressure. PW-1 was confronted with the principle of Samson 
Wright's Applied Physiology, page 152. He categorically ruled out 
application of the principle. (153-C; E-F; 154-B-C] 
Lax:man v. State of Maharashtra, [2002( 6 SCC 710, relied on. 
E 
Balak Ram v. State of UP., [1975) 3 sec 219, distinguished. 
Paparambaka Rosamma v. State of A.P., [1999) 7 SCC 695, overruled. 
Samson Wright's Applied Physiology, p. 152, referred to. 
1.3. The dying declaration of the deceased recorded by PW-1 and 
F well corroborated with other attending circumstances inspires confidence, 
on the basis of which conviction could be sustained. The High Court 
committed grave miscarriage of justice by reversing the conviction 
recorded by the trial court. Order of the High Court is set aside. The 
sentence and conviction recorded by the trial court is restored. [155-D-E) 
G 
H 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 546 of 
2000. 
Fro111 the Judgment and Order dated 2.7.1999 of the High Court of 
Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore, in Cr!. Appeal No. 678 of 1995. 
Niraj Sharma for the Appellant. 
HEERALAL YADAV v. STATE OF M.P. [H.K. SEMA, J.] 
149 
S.K. Gambhir, Anil K. Sharma

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