HIRAMAN versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Citation: [2013] 3 S.C.R. 119 · Decided: 31-01-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. PATNAIK · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2013) 3 S.C.R. 119 
HI RAMAN 
v. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1288 of 2008) 
JANUARY 31, 2013 
[A.K. PATNAIK AND H.L. GOKHALE, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Evidence Act, 1872 - s. 32 -
Relevance of dying 
declarations - Approach to be adopted by the Courts with 
respect thereto - Held: By enacting s.32(1) in the Evidence 
C 
Act, the legislature has accorded a special sanctity to the 
statement made by a dying person as to the cause of his own 
death - This is by virtue of the solemn occasion when such 
statement is made - Besides, when such statement is made 
at the earliest opportunity without any influence being brought D 
on the dying person, there is absolutely no reason to take any 
other view for the cause of his or her death - Absence of any 
corroboration cannot take away its relevance - Exaggerated 
doubts, on account of absence of corroboration, will only lead 
to unmerited acquittals, causing grave harm to the cause of E 
justice and ultimately to the social fabric - On facts, the dying 
declarations of the appellant's wife gave the real cause of her 
burn injuries - The victim having suffered 91% burn injuries, 
there was hardly any time to secure the presence of competent 
magistrate or to record her statement in a detailed question-
F 
answer form - Absence of these factors itself did not take away 
the evidentiary value of the recorded statement - There were 
two dying declarations recorded at the earliest opportunity -
They contained the motive for the crime, and the reasons as 
to why the deceased suffered the burn injuries viz., the greed 
G 
of the appellant to which the deceased had refused to 
succumb - As far as her statements viz., that the appellant 
had poured kerosene and set her on fire is concerned, there 
is no reason to discard it considering the fact that it was made 
119 
H 
120 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2013] 3 S.C.R. 
A at the earliest opportunity and on a solemn occasion - The 
defence put up a story which was totally inconsistent with the 
facts on record, and is a clear afterthought and therefore 
unacceptable - The prosecution proved its case beyond any 
reasonable doubt. 
B 
The appellant's wife died an unnatural death, having 
suffered 91 % burn injuries. The trial court held the 
appellant responsible for the same, principally on the 
basis of her dying declarations, and convicted him for 
cruelty and murder under Sections 498-A and 302 of IPC. 
C The conviction u/s 302 of IPC was confirmed by the High 
Court in Criminal Appeal, though the one under Section 
498-A of IPC was set-aside for the lack of sufficient 
evidence. The Courts below accepted the two dying 
declarations of deceased 'C' as giving the correct cause 
D for the burn injuries viz. that they were caused by tha 
appellant. They rejected the defence of the appellant that 
he was nowhere near the deceased at the time of the 
incident and that he was not responsible for the same. 
The judgment of the High Court was challenged before 
E this Court for being rendered solely on the basis of dying 
declarations. 
The instant appeal thus raises question about the 
relevance of dying declarations, and the approach to be 
F adopted by the Courts with respect thereto. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. The dying declarations of the appellant's 
wife gave the real cause of her burn injuries. The victim 
G 'C' having suffered 91 % burn injuries, there was hardly 
any time to secure the presence of competent magistrate 
or to rEcord her statement in a detailed question-answer 
form. Absence of these factors itself will not take away 
the evidentiary value of the recorded statement. [Para 8] 
H [131-F-G] 
HIRAMAN v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
121 
1.2. By enacting Section 32 (1) in the Evidence Act, 
A 
1872, the legislature has accorded a special sanctity to 
the statement made by a dying person as to the cause 
of his own death. This is by virtue of the solemn occasion 
when the statement is made. Besides, when the 
statement is made at the earliest opportunity without any 
B 
influence being brought on the dying person, there is 
absolutely no reason to take any other view for the cause 
of his or her death. The statement has to be accepted 
as the relevant and truthful one, revealing the 
circumstances which resulted into his death. Absence c 
of any corroboration can not take away its relevance. 
Exaggerated doubts, on account of absence of 
corroboration, will only lead to unmerited acquittals, 
causing grave harm t

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