The division judge bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that when the dying declaration is truthful and voluntary, it can be made basis for conviction, without any corroboration. It can be treated as substantive piece of evidence.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the A-2 (father of the deceased) was married to Smt.Venkayamma. later on, A-2 deserted her and married to A-1. The paternal aunt of the deceased gifted a portion of the property to the deceased. The deceased stayed with her paternal aunt, and after the death of the paternal aunt, she came to the house of her father. However, A-1 used to ask A-2 to send away the deceased with the intention of grabbing the property. Furthermore, they went into a quarrel with the deceased and they poured kerosene and set the deceased on fire. Thereafter, the deceased was taken to the hospital and the head constable in the presence of the duty doctor recorded the statement of the deceased. The case was registered for the offense U/s.302 r/w.34 I.P.C.
The trial court found the accused A-1 and A-2 guilty, and convicted them for the offense U/s.302 I.P.C. Therefore, the appeal is filed in order to challenge the judgment.
Contentions of the Appellant
The Appellant contended that the trial court erroneously convicted the appellant on the basis of the dying declaration. It was furthermore submitted that a photograph of the scene of the offense was not recorded as per Rule 33 of Criminal Rules of Practice and Circular Orders of Andhra Pradesh High Court, 1980.
Contentions of the State
The State contended that in cases where the dying declaration develops the court with confidence and trustworthiness, it can serve as the sole basis for an order of conviction and punishment without the need for further corroboration. It was furthermore contended that the dying declaration was made voluntarily and was not a result of tutoring or prompting. Also, the conduct of the accused clearly shows that they didn’t make any attempts to save the deceased.
The state relied upon the judgment titled P.V.Rama Krishna Vs. State of Karnataka, Sharad Vs. State of Maharashtra, Munnu Raja Vs. State of Madhyapradesh, and Om pal Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble Court observed that the duty doctor admitted that the victim was conscious and could make the statement. Also, no alarm was raised by the accused persons, and no parent, regardless of whether it is self-immolation or an accident, will ever witness their child burning in the fire and will remain silent.
It was furthermore observed that conviction might be based just on the voluntary and true dying declaration, without the need for further corroboration. It can be treated as a substantive piece of evidence.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the opinion that the dying declaration of the deceased recorded by the Head Constable, can be relied upon as solitary piece of evidence to convict the accused.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court dismissed the Appeal.
Case Title: Martha Yogamma V. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.V.L.N.Chakravarthi, and Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. Suresh Reddy
Case No.: CRL.A.No.297 OF 2016 & 1023 OF 2016
Advocate for the Appellant: Sri Dr.Challa Srinivasa Reddy
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
