MANIBEN W/O. DANABHAI TULSHIBAI MAHERIA versus STTE OF GUJARAT

Citation: [2007] 6 S.C.R. 409 · Decided: 11-05-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

.....,._ 
MANIBEN W/O. DANABHAI TIJLSHIBAI MAHERIA 
A 
v. 
ST A TE OF GUJARAT 
MAY 11, 2007 
(S.B. SINHA AND MARKANDEY KA TJU, JJ.) 
B 
I 
Evidence Act, 1872-s. 32-Dying Declaration-Reliability-Deceased 
,,.. 
-< 
burnt by pouring kerosene over her by mother-in-law and brother-in-lmi~ 
Conviction on basis of dying declarations-Correctness of-Held: There is c 
no discrepancy in the dying declarations-There is specific statement 
regarding involvement of the accused though actual overt act played by 
mother-in-law is not stated-Also dying declaration cannot be discarded 
only because death took place 25 days after the incident-Thus, conviction 
justified. 
D 
According to the prosecution, there was dispute between the families • 
..,, 
On the fateful day mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased burnt her 
> 
by pouring kerosene over her body. The deceased tried to extinguish the fire. 
In the meanwhile, she suffered extensive burn injuries. Her relatives and some 
neighbours came to her help. And took her to the hospital and informed her E 
husband. She stated the cause of receiving burn injuries to the doctor. The 
Magistrate recorded her dying declaration. FIR was lodged. Trial Court 
convicted both the accused. High Court upheld the order. SLP by the brother-
in-law was dismissed. Hence the present 11ppeal by the appellant 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
F 
..-·---r 
HELD: 1.1. There is no discrepancy in regard to the involvement of the 
appellant vis-a-vis he~ son. The only discrepancy which has been pointed out 
by appellant was that in some of her statements, she had not stated the actual 
overt act played'by appellant herein. In these statements, she merely had G 
answered the questions put to her by different persons. When questions are 
put differently, answers would also appear to be different. On a first glance, 
it may appear that the detailed description of the offence is missing, but the 
....,... 
statement of the deceased must be construed reasonably. The presence of the 
appellant at the house at the relevant time is not disputed and also the H 
409 
410 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2007) 6 S.C.R. 
A involvement of appellant's son. Only because her hu~IJand had rushed to the 
hospital upon hearing the news, the same would not mean that the deceased 
was tutored by him. A son would not falsely implicate his mother, despite their 
bitter relationships. The very fact that the appellant and her son had developed 
ill relations with the deceased and her husband, is an indicator to show why 
B the incident had taken place. (Para llf (413-F-H; 414-A-BI 
1.2. The defence case that the deceased had committed suicide was 
disbelieved because she was pregnant and she had a daughter aged about 2 
and 1/2 years. Her statement that she had come to answer the call of the nature 
on the wash room at the ground floor which was common one and thereafter 
C had been going upstairs cannot be disbelieved in view the nature of the injuries. 
Even the appellant conceded that she must have fallen on the ground and the 
kerosene was poured on the front portion of her body. Furthermore, had the 
appellant not participated in the commission of the offence, she should have 
been the first person to raise a hue and cry and call her other daughter-in-
D laws and neighbours. Immediately after the occurrence, she was not found at 
her house. Both the accused were arrested at a much later stage. 
(Paras 12 and 131 (414-B-E) 
1.3. Much capital is sought to be made from the fact that the doctor who 
took down her statement at the hospital has not been examined. However, the 
E doctor who treated her, has been examined and he also supported the 
prosecution case in regard to the incident in question. He might not have taken 
down her statement but it is natural that he would ask the deceased about the 
cause of her sustaining burn injuries. The submission that the 'degree of 
burn' was not disclosed by doctor who took down her statement at the hospital 
F is immaterial. In view of the admitted fact that kerosene was used for causing 
injuries and having regard to the nature of the injuries, the injuries would 
be of third degree. [Para 14) [414-E-F) 
1.4. A dying declaration need not cease to be one only because death 
took place 25 days after the incident. All attempts would be made to save a 
G precious life of a 25 year old young woman. The doctors must have tried their 
best. Dying declaration which is recorded in expectation 

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