NARENDER KUMAR versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: [2015] 15 S.C.R. 179 · Decided: 16-12-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 15 S.C.R. 179 
NARENDER KUMAR 
v. 
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 
(Criminal Appeal No. 447 of 2010) 
D.ECEMBER 16, 2015 
[FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULL:A AND 
UDAY UM ESH LAUT, JJ.) 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860: s.302 rlw s.34- Prosecution case 
was that the victim-deceased was picked up by the appellants C 
police officials and illegally confined in police post and was 
beaten severely to extract confession from him that he was 
involved in stealing of some· properties and thereafter 
kerosene was poured on him and set on fire by appellants 
by thro_wing ignited matchstick - Dying declaration was D 
recorded by magistrate in the presence of doctor- Conviction 
by courts below on the basis of dying declaration -
Challenged on the ground that the identity of the deceased 
was not verified by the magistrate before recording dying 
declaration and thus dying declaration was not reliable - On 
E 
appeal, held: The dying declaration was recorded by the 
magistrate after doctor noted the condition of the patient and 
after ensuring that the patient was fully conscious and capable 
of making statement - There was no reason to disbelieve 
the version of the doctor and the magistrate - Further, dying 
F 
declaration is not liable to be rejected on mere omis_sion of 
getting thumb impression or signature of the deceased- No 
interference with the order of conviction. 
Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1. It was contended that the identity of the 
deceased was not verified by the Metropolitan Magistrate 
PW-7. The evidence of PW-7 the Magistrate was to the 
effect that PW-12, the doctor identified the patient to him 
179 
.G 
H 
180 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 15S.C.R. 
A though he had not obtained the identification of the 
patient in writing from PW-12. That apart, in the initial 
part of the evidence he has narrated as to how PW-2 the 
ASI approached him to record the dying declaration of 
the deceased, that he was accompanied by PW-2 to the 
B ·hospital, that he was taken to the patient thereafter, 
namely, the deceased and after satisfying himself that 
the patien1: was fully conscious and was capable of 
making the statement and making an endorsement and 
also after getting it endorsed by PW-12 he proceeded to 
c record the dying declaration of the deceased. Having 
regard to the said statement of PW-12, which was also 
corroborated in every respect by PW-7 who has made 
· an endorsement in the dying declaration itself that the 
patient was fully conscious and capable of making his 
o statement and the said witnesses are official witnesses 
one of whom, namely, PW-12 is an expert witness, there 
is no reason to disbelieve their version and, therefore, 
the submission on that footing is liable to be rejected. 
[Paras 9and13] [189-A-D; 190-D-E] 
E 
2. It was then contended that the dying declaration 
did not contain either the signature or thumb impression 
of the deceased which is in violation of the guidelines 
issued by the High Court of Delhi in regard to the 
recording of dying declaration. In the first place, it must 
F be stated that it was only a guideline. The guidelines 
were issued by the High Court in order to ensure that 
any defect in regard to the identity of the deceased or 
the veracity of the contents of the dying declaration are 
not doubted on the ground that the concerned patient 
G himself could not have made such a statement in order 
to implicate someone in the offence. Merely because 
there was a defect in following the said guideline, which, 
is of a trivial nature and when the dying declaration 
H 
NARENDER KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 
181 
recorded is otherwise proved by ample evidence, the A 
whole of the dying declaration cannot be thrown out. In 
the case on hand, the dying declaration was recorded 
by PW-7 who was summoned by PW-12 the doctor who 
noted the condition of the patient and PW-7 was brought 
to the hospital by PW-2, the ASI and before recording B 
the dying declaration PW-12 endorsed the capability of 
the deceased to make the statement apart from PW-7 
himself ensuring that the deceased was in a fit condition 
to make the statement and thereafter the said statement 
was recorded by PW-7 a responsible judicial Officer. It c 
cannot be held that simply because PW-7 omitted to get 
the thumb impression or signature of the deceased the 
dying declaration should be rejected. The dying 
declaration was proved in the manner known to law and, 
therefore, there was no scope to re

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