PURAN CHAND versus STATE OF HARYANA

Citation: [2010] 7 S.C.R. 21 · Decided: 13-05-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.S. SIRPURKAR · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2010] 7 S.C.R: 21 
PURAN CHAND 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1818 of 2009) 
MAY 13, 2010 
[V.S. SIRPURKAR AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, 
JJ.] 
/ 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860 - s. 302 rlw s. 34 - Death of married 
woman due to burn injuries - Dying declaration recorded by C 
Judicial Magistrate, First Class after Doctor gave medical 
certificate that deceased was in a fit mental state to give the 
dying declaration-. Trial court convicted all the three accused 
viz., husband, brother-in-law and aunt-in-law of the deceased 
by placing reliance. upon the dying declaration - High Court o 
acquitted the aunt-in-law but confirmed the conviction of 
husband and brother-in-law - Further appeal by brother-in-law 
before Supreme Court on ground that the dying declaration 
· was not credible - Held: The dying declaratioq was recorded 
by an independent witness, who was working as a Judicial 
E 
Magistrate, First Class, and before it commenced, the 
Magistrate had satisfied himself about the ability of deceased 
to make a dying declaration -
There was also an 
endorsement from the doctor as regards the fitness of the 
victim to give the dying declaration - Dying declaration was 
not only voluntary but truthful also and, hence, it could be 
relied upon as was done by the trial Court and the High Court 
- Conviction of appellant brother-in-law maintained. 
Evidence Act, 1872 -
s. 32 -
Dying declaration -
F 
Principles governing dying declaration re-iterated. 
G 
A married woman died of burn injuries. It was alleged 
by the prosecution that kerosene oil had been sprinkled 
on the deceased and there·after she was set on fire. 
21 
H 
22 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010] 7 S.C.R. 
A Pursuant to the incident, the deceased had been removed 
to a hospital where she gave a dying declaration. The 
dying declaration was got recorded by PW13, a First 
Class Judicial Magistrate, after PW14, the attending 
doctor, gave medical certificate that the deceased was in 
B a fit mental state to give the dying declaration. 
Trial court convicted all the three accused viz., 
husband, brother-in-law and aunt-in-law of the deceased 
u/s.302 r/w s.34, primarily, by placing reliance upon the 
said dying declaration. On appeal, the High Court 
C acquitted the aunt-in-law but confirmed the conviction of 
husband and brother-in-law. The husband chose not to 
file any further appeal. 
The brother-in-law, i.e. the appellant, however, 
o challenged his conviction before this Court contending 
that the dying declaration was tutored and that there were 
intrinsic defects in the dying declaration which militated 
against its credibility. 
It was contended that, firstly, the name of the 
E appellant was not to be found in the dying declaration 
and there was a mere reference to the Jeth (elder brother 
of the husband); that there was one more brother of the 
deceased's husband, and it was not certain as to whether 
the deceased referred to appellant. It was further 
F contended that the deceased had suffered 90 per cent of 
burns and, therefore, it was not possible that she would 
be in her senses while making the dying declaration; that 
no kerosene oil residues were found on the clothes 
which were seized; and also that the evidence of PW-5, 
G PW-10 and PW-8, who claimed that an oral dying 
declaration was made to them, was also not reliable in 
view of the evidence of PW-4 who had stated that no such 
oral dying declaration was made by the deceased. 
H 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
PURAN CHAND v. STATE OF HARYANA 
-23 
HELD:1. Ordinarily, though the oral dying declaration 
A 
is an extremely weak type of evidence, it would not be 
unnatural for a burnt woman, to confide in her near 
relations like her cousin, PW-5, father PW-1 and PW-8 who 
is also a near relation. The deceased would rather be 
keen to express herself regarding the cause- of her death. s 
Had the prosecution relied only on the oral dying 
declaration, things could hav,e ·been different. However, 
there is a dying declaration, Ex~ P .F-/3, which is recorded 
by a Judicial Magistrate, First class.[Para SJ [31-F-H; 32-
A-B] 
C 
2.1. The dying declaration has been recorded by an 
independent witness who was working as a Judicial 
Magistrate, First Class, and before it commenced, the 
Magistrate had satisfied himself about the ability of 
deceased to make a_ dying declaration. Also, there is an 
D 
endorsement from PW14, who had examined deceased 
and had given a certificate that deceased w

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