LexJAGBIR SINGH versus STATE
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 1137 JAGBIR SINGH v. STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) (Criminal Appeal No. 967 of 2015) SEPTEMBER 04, 2019 [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL AND K. M. JOSEPH, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: ss. 302 and 506 - Prosecution under - Alleging that the accused killed his wife setting her ablaze after pouring kerosene oil over her - Accused also sustained burn injuries - In the MLC (on 24.1.2008 the date of incident) the victim-wife made her statement that fire was accidental which was caused due to leakage of petrol from the tank of motorcycle when the accused was lighting his 'biri' - On 25.1.2018 in statement made to the police officer the victim did not implicate the accused - However, in her statement dated 27.01.2008 the victim attributed the act of setting her ablaze by pouring kerosene oil over her - Presence of kerosene oil on the clothes of the victim, at the scene of incident and also on the articles recovered therefrom - Plea of accused that he was being implicated in the case pursuant to a conspiracy by the other sisters, brother-in-law and mother of the deceased-victim to deprive him of the property of the deceased - Courts below convicted the accused relying on dying declaration dated 27.01.2008 discarding the earlier two statements of the deceased and also relying on other evidence - Appeal to Supreme Court - Held: There is overwhelming evidence that the fire was caused by the use of kerosene - The statements of deceased dated 24.01.2008 and 25.01.2008 do not explain the cause of smell of kerosene from the body of the deceased as well as the accused and from the clothes of the deceased - The version as projected in the statement/declaration dated 27.1.2008 is clinchingly proved as the same is corroborated by other evidence - The declaration dated 27.01.2008 is reliable as the deceased was fit to make the declaration - Evidence Act, 1872 - s. 32 - Dying Declaration. 1137 [2019] 11 S.C.R. 1137 A B C D E F G H 1138 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 11 S.C.R. Dying Declaration: Evidentiary value of dying declaration - Held: Conviction can be based solely on dying declaration - If the court finds that there is nothing suspicious about the declaration; that there is no tutoring or prompting; and that imagination was not at play in making the declaration, no corroboration is required. Multiple dying declarations - Inconsistent and irreconcilable declarations being repugnant to one another - Reliance on - Held: The Court, after examining the entirety of materials as also the circumstances surrounding the making of the different dying declarations, should act upon the truthful dying declaration. Absence of medical certificate as to fit mental and physical condition of the person making dying declaration - Effect of - Held: The medical certificate would go a long way in inspiring confidence of the court in the declaration - However, such certificate is essentially a rule of caution - The voluntary and truthful nature of declaration can be established otherwise - Absence of such certificate is not fatal. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 Conviction of a person can be made solely on the basis of a dying declaration which inspires confidence of the court. If there is nothing suspicious about the declaration, no corroboration may be necessary. No doubt, the court must be satisfied that there is no tutoring or prompting, the court must also analyse and come to the conclusion that imagination of the deceased was not at play in making the declaration. In this regard, the court must look to the entirety of the language of the dying declaration. Considering material before it, both in the form of oral and documentary evidence, the court must be satisfied that the version is compatible with the reality and the truth, as can be gleaned from the facts established. [Para 30] [1164-E-H] 1.2 There may be cases where there are more than one dying declaration. If there are more than one dying declaration, the dying declarations may entirely agree with one another. There may be dying declarations where inconsistencies between the declarations emerge. The extent of the inconsistencies would A B C D E F G H 1139 then have to be considered by the court. The inconsistencies may turn out to be reconciliable. In such cases, where the inconsistencies go to some matter of detail or description but is incriminatory in nature as far as the accused is concerned, the court would look to the material on record to conclude as to which dying decl
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.