LexVAARIKUPPAL SRINIVAS versus STATE OF A.P.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
- [2009] 1 S.C.R. 680 A VMRIKUPPAL SRINIVAS v. STATE OF A.P. (Criminal Appeal No. 168 of 2009) B JANUARY 28, 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR GANGUL Y, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 - s. 498A and 3048 - Conviction on c the basis of dying declaration - Held: conviction justified. Dying Declaration - Evidentiary value of - Discussed. Appellant-accused was convicted uls. 498A and D 3048 IPC, for having caused death of his wife. The conviction was on the basis of dying declaration and another statement by the deceased, made to a police constable. His conviction was confirmed by High Court. In appeal to this Court appellant contended that E dying declaration could not have been relied upon because the medical evidence does not show that the victim was in a position to give any statement. Dismissing the appeal, the Court F HELD: 1.1 The trial court and the High Court have rightly convicted the appellant for offence punishable under Section 498A and 3048 IP. The basis for conviction of the accused by the trial court was the dying declarations. The situation in which a person is on his G deathbed, being exceedingly solemn, serene and grave, is the reason in law to accept the veracity of his statement. It is for this reason that the requirements of oath and cross-examination are dispensed with. Besides should the dying declaration be excluded it will result in H 680 VAARIKUPPAL SRINIVAS v. STATE OF A.P. 681 miscarriage of justice because the victim being generally A _..,,_ the only eye-witness in a serious crime, the exclusion of the statement would leave the court without a scrap of evidence. [Paras 9 and 7] [688-B; 685-F-G] 1.2. Though a dying declaration is entitled to great B weight, it is worthwhile to note that the accused has no power of cross-examination. Such a power is essential for eliciting the truth as an obligation of oath could be. This is the reason the court also insists that the dying declaration should be of such nature as to inspire full c 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 of imagination. The court must be further satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind after a clear D 4 opportunity to observe and identify the assailant. Once the court is satisfied that the declaration was true and voluntary, it can base its conviction without any further corroboration. It cannot be laid down as an absolute rule of law that the dying declaration cannot form the sole E basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. The rule requiring corroboration is merely a rule of prudence. [Para 8] [685-H; 686-A-D] Smt. Paniben v. State of Gujarat AIR 1992 SC 1817, relied on. F Munnu Raja and Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 2 SCR 764; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ram Sagar Yadav and Ors. AIR 1985 SC 416: Ramavati Devi v. State of Bihar AIR 1983 SC 164; K. Ramachandra Reddy and Anr. v. The G Public Prosecutor, AIR 1976 SC 1994; Rasheed Beg v. State of Madhya Pradesh 1974(4) SCC 264; Kaka Singh v State of MP AIR 1982 SC 1021; Ram Manorath and Ors. v. State of U.P 1981 (2) SCC 654; State of Maharashtra v. Krishnamurthi Laxmipati Naidu AIR 1981 SC 617; Surajdeo H Oza and Ors. v. State of Bihar AIR 1979 SC 1505; Nanahau 682 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 1 S.C.R. A Ram and Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1988 SC 912; State of UP. v. Madan Mohan and Ors. AIR 1989 SC 1519; Mohan/al Gangaram Gehani v. State of Maharashtra AIR ·1982 SC 839 and Mohan Lal and Ors. v. State of Haryana 2007 (9) sec 151, referred to. B Case Law Reference: AIR 1992 SC 1817 Relied on. Para 8 1976 2 SCR 764 Referred to. Para 8 c AIR 1985 SC 416 Referred to. Para 8 AIR 1983 SC 164 Referred to. Para 8 AIR 1976 SC 1994 Referred to. Para 8 D 1974(4) sec 264 Referred to. Para 8 AIR 1982 SC 1021 Referred to. Para 8 1981(2) sec 654 Referred to. Para 8 AIR 1981 SC 617 Referred to. Para 8 E AIR 1979 SC 1505 Referred to. Para 8 AIR 1988 SC 912 Referred to. Para 8 AIR 1989 SC 1519 Referred to. Para 8 •F AIR 1982 SC 839 Referred to. Para 8 2001 (9) sec 151 Referred to. Para 8 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal -- No. 168 of 2009. .., From the Judgment and final Order dated 21.03.2007 of the High Court of Judicature Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Criminal Appeal No. 1001 o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.