NAGABHUSHAN versus THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Citation: [2021] 2 S.C.R. 595 · Decided: 08-03-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
595
NAGABHUSHAN
v.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
(Criminal Appeal No. 443 of 2020)
MARCH 08, 2021
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD AND
M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – s.300(fourthly); ss.498A, 302 r/w
34 – Dowry death – Dying declaration – Accused persons acquitted
by trial Court – Acquittal of appellant-accused reversed by High
Court – On appeal, held: There are two dying declarations, Exhibit
P5 and Exhibit D2 – As per dying declaration Exhibit P5, it has
been proved that the deceased was set ablaze by pouring kerosene
on her – Prosecution is successful in proving that the appellant
poured kerosene on the deceased – Act of the accused falls in clause
fourthly of s.300 – Merely because thereafter he might have tried
to extinguish the fire, that will not bring the case out of clause
fourthly of s.300 – High Court rightly convicted the accused for
offence u/s.302 – No reason to interfere with the impugned judgment
– Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.378.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The High Court has specifically observed and
held that the finding recorded by the trial Court discarding and/
or not believing the dying declaration (Exhibit P5) is perverse
and contrary to the evidence on record. The High Court has given
cogent reasons while believing dying declaration (Exhibit P5) and
has also considered in detail what is stated in the later dying
declaration (Exhibit P5), vis-à-vis, the medical evidence and the
injuries sustained by the deceased. Therefore, as such, the High
Court has not committed any error in reappreciating the entire
evidence on record and thereafter interfering with the judgment
and order of acquittal passed by the trial Court, having found the
finding recorded by the trial Court perverse. In the present case
there are two dying declarations, (i) Exhibit P5 and (ii) Exhibit
D2. When there are multiple dying declarations, each dying
[2021] 2 S.C.R. 595
595
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
596
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 2 S.C.R.
declaration has to be separately assessed and evaluated on its
own merits. The High Court in the impugned judgment and order
has given cogent reasons to rely upon and believe the second
dying declaration – Exhibit P5. The High Court has also taken
note of the fact that the second dying declaration is reliable and
the version in the second dying declaration is supported by the
circumstances, namely, the injuries sustained by the deceased;
no stove was found at the place of occurrence. The High Court
has also taken note of the fact that in the second dying declaration,
the deceased has explained her first statement that it was a case
of accident and she categorically stated in the second dying
declaration that at the time when she gave first statement that it
was a case of accident, she was given threats by the appellant
herein – original accused no.1 that he will kill her children also.
She also stated in the second dying declaration that after her
parents came, she got the courage to tell the truth. Therefore, as
such, the High Court rightly believed the second dying declaration
– Exhibit P5. [Paras 6-8][609-E-H; 610-A-C]
1.2 The plea put forth by the defence that it was a case of
an accident and while pouring the kerosene from kerosene can
to the bottle, the same had fallen on the clothes placed on the
ground and when the deceased tried to remove the clothes from
that place, the candle fell on the ground, as a result, her clothes
caught fire and she sustained burn injuries is disbelieved by the
High Court considering the circumstances noted by the High
Court that the deceased sustained injuries on the face, chest and
back and to the upper limbs. The main injuries are found on the
upper limbs of the body. Therefore, as rightly observed by the
High Court, the aforesaid injuries can be possible when the
kerosene is poured on the deceased. According to the defence
and as per the evidence of DW1-A1, while putting the kerosene
into the stove, accidentally the kerosene had fallen on the ground
and also on her clothes, and thereafter when the candle fell on
the ground, the same had come in contact with her clothes and
kerosene. If that is the case, there would have been injuries to
her feet also. However, no burn injuries are found on her feet.
No stove was found at the place of occurrence. Therefore, the
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
597
defence came out with a false case of accidental fire, which, as
such, is not supported by any other reliable evidence. On the
contrary, thi

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