JAI KARAN versus STATE OF (N.C.T. OF DELHI)

Citation: [1999] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 200 · Decided: 27-09-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.T. THOMAS · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
JAi KARAN 
v. 
STATE OF (N.C.T. OF DELHI) 
SEPTEMBER 27, 1999 
B 
[K.T. THOMAS AND D.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.] 
Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Section 302. 
Murder---Accused--<:ausing death of wife by burning her-Conviction 
C based on dying declaration of wife-Validity of. 
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 : Section 32. 
Dying declaration-Evidentiary value of-Accused-Allegation of wife 
burning-Dying declaration by deceased wife before Doctor-Evidence dis-
D closing that Doctor before whom declaration was made was not on duty in 
the ward in which deceased was admitted-Statement made by deceased in 
Hindi recorded in English and also not read over to her-Signature of 
deceased not obtained-No endorsement that deceased was in a fircondition 
to make statement-Held, dying declaration made in such circumstances was 
E not reliable-Conviction based on such a declaration held not valid. 
The appellant was prosecuted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal 
Code, 1860. The prosecution case was that he burnt his wife by pouring 
kerosene oil on her after a fight between the two. The evidence rested 
solely on the dying declaration made by the deceased before a Doctor in 
F the hospital. However, it was evident from the record that the Doctor 
before whom the dying declaration was claimed to have been made was 
not allotted duty in the unit in which deceased was admitted. In his 
evidence the said doctor stated that the injured person made the state-
ment in Hindi while he recorded it in English; that he had not read over 
G and explained the contents of the documents to the injured and had also 
not taken signature or thumb impression of the deceased on the docu-
ment. Relying upon the said dying declaration the Trial Court convicted 
the appellant and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for life. On 
appeal the High Court held that the dying declaration was a reliable piece 
of evidence on which the order of conviction could be based and accord-
H ingly confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court. 
200 
JAI KARAN v. ST_ATE OF (N.C.T. OF DELHI) 
201 
In appeal to this Court ·on the question whether the dying declara-
A 
tion made by the deceased was reliable and conviction can be based on 
the same: 
Allowing the appeal and setting aside the impugned judgment, this 
Court 
HELD : 1. The Courts below erred in passing the judgment and 
order of conviction against the appellant on the basis of dying declaration. 
In the facts and circumstances of the case emerging from the evidence on 
record it is difficult to rely on the alleged dying declaration as the sole 
B 
basis for conviction. [210-A] 
C 
2. From the statement of Doctor, who was the head of the unit of 
the hospital in which deceased was admitted, it is clear that the Doctor 
before·whom the dying declaration was said to have been made, was not 
allotted duty in the unit in which the deceased was admitted. This state-
ment by the head of the unit is very important. It raises a serious doubt D 
whether the Doctor before whom the dying delcaration was said to have 
been made was at all on duty in the burns ward at the time when the 
injured was admitted. Further, from the endorsement made by another 
Doctor who was the medical officer in charge of the ward it is clear that 
the deceased was not in a fit condition for making a statement. There was 
no statement as to when her condition improved and she became fit for 
making the statement. Consequently, it will not be safe to convict the 
appellant solely on the basis of the dying declaration made by the 
deceased. [209-E·F-G; 210-A] 
E 
3. A dying declaration is admissible in evidence on the pl'inciple of F 
necessity and can form the basis for conviction if it is found to be reliable. 
While it is in the nature of an exception to the general rule forbidding 
hearsay evidence, it is admitted on the premise that ordinarily a dying 
person will not falsely implicate an innocent person in the commission of 
a serious crime. It is this premise which is considered strong enough to 
set off the need that the maker of the statement should state so on oath G 
and be cross examined by the person who is sought to be implicated. Jn 
order that a dying declaration may form the sole basis for conviction 
without the need for independent corroboration it must be shown that the 
person making it had the opportunity of identifying the person implicated 
and is thoroughly reliable and free from blemish. If, in the facts and H 
202

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