STATE OF RAJASTHAN versus BHUP RAM

Citation: [1997] 1 S.C.R. 190 · Decided: 13-01-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.S. ANAND, K.T. THOMAS

Judgment (excerpt)

\ 
,_ 
A 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN 
~ 
v. 
BHUP RAM 
JANUARY 13, 1997 
B 
[DR. A.S. ANAND AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.) 
Crimi11al Law : · 
)o 
Crimi11al Procedure Code, 1973 : Sectio11 164. 
c 
Dyi11g declaratio11--Recordi11g of-Mode of-Deceased a11swered ques-
tio11s i11 · Bagri la11guage while Magistrate recorded it in Hindi-Answers 
recorded in na1Tative f onn and 11ot i11 questions and answers f onn--Held : 
Dyi11g declaration was 11ot vitiated merely because it was recorded in a 
different language-Co11viction could be based upon it-High Coult e1Ted in 
D not relying 011 the dying declaration and setting aside conviction recorded by 
~ 
trial coun--fai1ence Ac4 1872, S.32. 
Evidence Act, 1872 : Section 27. 
Weapon of off ence--Recovery of-On basis of statement made by 
E accused during investigation in another cas~ditions for applicability 
of-Held : such infonnation admissible in evidence-It was immaterial 
whether inf omzation was supplied in connection with same crime or a dif-
ferent crime. 
Pistof-Recovery of-At the instance of acc1tsed-Ballistic expelt opined 
-t-
F that bullet recovered from body of deceased could have been fired from said 
pistol-High Coult overlooked this circumstance-Held : this circumstance 
should have been kept in mind while considering legal implication of evidence 
relating to recovery of pistol. 
G 
Tite respondent-accused was convicted of an offence under Section 
302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. But, on appeal, the High Court 
acquitted the respondent. Hence this appeal. 
;-
According to the prosecution, the deceased was first married to the 
respondent's brother who died after a brief marital life. Thereafter, the 
H deceased was given in marriage to the respondent, but the new alliance was 
190 
) 
STATEv. BHUPRAM 
191 
-t 
marred by frequent skirmishes and bickerings between the spouses. The A 
deceased was residing in the house of her parents. The estrangement 
between the couple reached a point of no return and the respondent wished 
to get rid of tbe deceased. So the respondent went to the house of the 
deceased on the night of occurrence and shot at the deceased with a pistol. 
The deceased was. taken to the hospital and her dying declaration was B 
recorded by the Judicial Magistrate. 
·">( 
Tiie respondent was arrested in connection with another criminal 
case and on the strength of the information elicited from him the police 
recovered a pistol. Tiie pistol as well as the bullet recovered from the body 
; 
of the deceased were sent to the ballistic expert ·who opined that the bullet c 
could have been fired from the said pistol. 
High Court declined to act on the dying declaration since the 
. deceased answered the questions put to her by the magistrate in Bagri 
language whereas-the magistrate recorded It In flindi in a narrative form 
instead of in questions and 1mswers form. Tiie High Court also held that D 
the evidence relating to the recovery of pistol was outside the scope of 
Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872 inasmuch as the recovery was elTected 
during investigation of another case. Tiie High Court also overlooked the 
opinion of the Ballistic expert. Hence this appeal by the State Government. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
E 
HELD 1.1. Assuming that the deceased gave her statement in her 
own language, the dying declaration would not vitiate merely because it 
.__,.-
was recorded in a dllTerent language. It is not unusual that courts record 
evidence in the language of the court even when witnesses depose in their F 
own language. Judicial Officers are used to the practice of translating the 
statements from the language of the parties to the langtiage of the court. 
Such translation process would not upset either the admissibility of the 
statement or its reliability, unless there are other reasons to doubt the 
truth of it. [19S·E] 
G 
1.2. A dying declaration would not go bad merely because the 
.... 
magistrate did not record It In the form of questions and answers. It Is 
axiomatic that what matters Is the substance and not the form. Questions 
put to the dying man would have been formal and hence the answers given 
are material. Criminal courts may evince interest in knowing the contents H 
192 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS. 
(1997] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
of what the dying person said and the questions put to him are not very 
important normally. That part of the statement which. relates to the 
circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death gets the 
sanct

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