S.P. DEVARAJU versus STATE OF KARNATAKA

Citation: [2009] 2 S.C.R. 308 · Decided: 12-02-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 2 S. C.R. 308 
A 
S.P. DEVARAJU 
~ .... 
v. 
STATE OF KARNATAKA 
Criminal Appeal No.180 of 2002 
B 
FEBRUARY 12, 2009 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM 
SHARMA1 JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860 : 
Jo, 
c 
s.304, Part JI - Death caused due to assault by knife -
High Court set aside acquittal of accused-appellant as 
recorded by trial court and convicted him under s. 304, Part-II 
- Conviction on basis of dying declaration - Justification of -
Held: Justified- The dying declaration was trustworthy, credible 
and referred to a part of the incident as described by PW1 -
D Even otherwise it clearly implicated the appellant - There was 
no discussion by trial court to discard the dying declaration -
)" .. 
Trial court a/so did not discuss evidence relating to recovery 
of the weapon of assault - Conviction maintained. 
po-
Evidence Act, 1872 -
s.32 -
Dying declaration -
E Admissibility and appreciation of - Principles governing dying 
declaration summed up and re-iterated. 
According to the prosecution, the deceased was 
stabbed to death on account of a land dispute. The 
k 
,..,_ 
F 
deceased had knife injuries on his person. The trial court 
acquitted the.. accused, but on appeal, the High Court 
convicted the accused-appellant under s.304 Part II, IPC 
on the basis of dying declaration. Hence the present 
appeal. 
G 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD:1.1.The situation in which a person is on the 
~ ·" 
deathbed is so solem'n and serene when he is dying that 
the grave position in which he is placed, is the reason in 
law to accept the veracity of his statement. It is for this 
H 
308 
S.P. DEVARAJU V STATE OF KARNATAKA 
309 
,..._ 
~· 
reason that the requirements of oath and cross-
A 
examination are dispensed with. Besides, should the 
dying declaration be excluded it will result in miscarriage 
of justice because the victim being generally the only 
eyewitness in a serious crime, the exclusion of the 
statement would leave the court without a scrap of B 
evidence. [Para 6] [ 316-B, C] 
1.2. Though a dying declaration is entitled to great 
i 
; 
weight, it is worthwhile to note that the accused has no 
..., 
power of cross-examinatton. Such a power is essential 
for eliciting the truth as an obligation of oath could be. c 
This is the reason the court also insists that the dying 
declaration should be of such a nature as to inspire full 
confidence of the court in its correctness. The court has 
to be on guard that the statement of the deceased was 
not as a result of either tutoring, or prompting or a product D 
"( 
of imagination. The court must be further satisfied that 
' *' 
the deceased was in a fit state of mind after a clear 
opportunity to observe and identify the assailant. Once 
the court is satisfied that the declaration was true and 
' 
voluntary, undoubtedly, it can base its conviction on the 
-, 
same without any further corroboration. It cannot be laid E 
down as an absolute rule of law that the dying declaration 
cannot form the sole basis of conviction unless it is 
... 
; 
corroborated. The rule requiring corroboration is merely 
f 
a rule of prudence. [Para 7] [ 318-E, F, G] 
-of 
1.3. The principles governing dying declaration can 
F 
~ 
be summed up as under. (i) There is neither rule of law 
--.,{ 
I 
nor of prudence that dying declaration cannot be acted 
upon without corroboration. (ii) If the court is satisfied that 
the dying declaration is true and voluntary it can base 
conviction on it, without corroboration. (iii) The court has G 
~1 
to scrutinise the dying declaration carefully and must 
ensure that the declaration is not the result of tutoring, 
prompting or imagination. The deceased had an 
.... 
opportunity to observe and identify the assailants and 
was in a fit state to make the declaration. (iv) Where a dying H 
310 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009] 2 S.C.R. 
A declaration is suspicious, it should not be acted upon 
without corroborative evidence. (v) Where the deceased 
was unconscious and could never make any dying 
declaration the evidence with regard to it is to be rejected. 
(vi) A dying declaration which suffers from infirmity cannot 
B form the basis of conviction; (vii) Merely because a dying 
declaration does not contain the details as to the 
occurrence, it is not to be rejected. (viii) Equally, merely 
because it is a brief statement, it is not to be discarded. 
On the contrary, the shortness of the statement itself 
C guarantees truth. (ix) Normally, the court in

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