LexMOTI SINGH AND ANOTHER versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
"-...... .' 1963 Jan.u~y, 23. ·- ---.. ,_- -.. , ,__,, 688 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1~64] VOL. :MOTI SINGH AND--ANOTHEif v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (S.J. IMAM, K. SUBBA 'RAO, RAGHUBAR DAY.AL, and J. R. l\1umIOLKAR, JJ.) Criminal Trial-Dyin(J Declaratian-Aclmissibi/ity of- Oause of_ death of_ cleclarant not established-Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1of1872), s. 32 (1). ' Seven pe~sons including the appellants were convicted for murder. Relying upon the dying declaration :or one G, the High Court acquitted 'five of the accused. but convicted the . appellants. G had been injured during the occurrence and ·had been taken to the hospital where his dying declaration was recorded. He left the hospital and died 20 days later. Before any . post-mortem examination could be held, his body was cremated. The appellants contended that· the dying declara- tion was inadmissible and that . they were entitled to an acquittal. lleld,, that the dying decfaration was inadmissible in evidence. There was no evidence on the record as to what caused the death of G. The mere fact that G had received two gun shot injuries during the occurrence which in the opinion of the doctor were dangerous to life was not sufficient for holding that G must have died on ac:ount of these injuries. Under s. 32 (1) of the Evidence Act the Statement of a person who has died is relevant only when it relates to the cause of his death or to any of the circumstances of. the transaction which resulted in his death. When it was not established that G had died as a result of the injuries received at the incident, his statement did not relate to the cause of his death or to the circumstances of the transaction wh.lch resulted in his death and· did not fall within s. 32 (1). CRIMINAL APPELLATE JumsDICTION : Criminal Appeals Nos. 146 and 147 of 1962. Appeals by .special leave from the judgment and order dated February 2, 1962, of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal .Appeals Nos. 157 and 158 · of 1961 and Criminal Revision No. 384 of 1961. · · l S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 689 A. S. R. Chari, Ravinder Narain, J. B. Dadachnnji and 0. 0. Mathur, for the appellants. G .. O. Mathur and 0. P. Lal, for the respondent. 1963. January 23. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 1963 Moti Sin1h v. Sta11 ef U.P. RAoHUBAR DAYAL, J.-Moti Singh and &,ltublr D~. J. J agdamba Prasad, appellants, together with five other persons, were convicted by the Sessions Judge of Unnao of offences under s. 148, 302 read with 149 and 307 read with 149 I. P. C. Each of them was sentenced to life imprisonment undrr s. 302 read withs. 149 I. P. C. On appeal, the High Court acquitted the other five persons of the various offences. The conviction . of th~ appellants under s. 148 I. P. C., was also set aside, but their cc.nviction for the offences under ss. 302 and 307 read with s. 149 were altered to conviction for offences under ss. 302 and 307 read with s. 34 I. P. C .. On the application of Krishaa Kumar, brother of one of the persons who had been murdered, the High Court enhanced the sentence of the appellants for the offem:e of murder to death. Moti Singh and Jagdamba Prasad have preferred these appeals respectively, after obtaining special lea \'e from this Court. It is not necessary to detail the facts of the incident in which several persons lost ~heir lives and for participation in which incident the appellants were convicted, as we are of opinion that the convic· tion cannot be maintained on the basis of the evidence on record as appreciated by the High Court. All the eye witnesses of the incident deposed in practically identical terms about the progress of the incident in which it was alleged that the members of 1903 Moti .)ingh v. S<au qf U.P. Rdthubar Dayal, .I. 690 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1964] VOL. the accused party fired with guns and pistols both from inside and outside the room on one side of the passage and also from the seori (cattle shed) on the other side of the passage when the victim party passed along the passage. The High Court felt doubtful about the firing of the shots from the cattle shed, and consequently acquitted Sheo Shankar, Jagjiwan and Shankar Dayal who were said to be mainly the persons who had fired from that place. The High Court, however, believed the prose- cution version of the firing from the room and later from the platform. It appears that the High Court bel
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.