Recently, the Chhattisgarh High Court allowed the appeals and acquitted all four appellants of offences under Sections 304-B, 498-A, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The Court held that oral dying declaration is a weak kind of evidence and it can only be made the basis of conviction, if it inspires full confidence of the Court and if the Court is satisfied that the maker of the said oral dying declaration was in a fit state of mind at the time of making it.
Brief Facts:
The deceased was married to the appellant in 2016. On 28.05.2017, she sustained burn injuries allegedly due to cruelty and dowry demands by her husband and in-laws. She succumbed to her injuries on 16.07.2017. FIR was registered after her death, and the matter proceeded to trial. Initially, only appellant Ranjeeta Pandey was tried, as the other three appellants—Vinay Pandey (husband), Sachin Pandey (brother-in-law), and Saraswati @ Pinki (sister-in-law)—were absconding. Ranjeeta Pandey was convicted under Section 304-B IPC and sentenced to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment. After arrest, the remaining three were also convicted under Sections 304-B, 498-A IPC, and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. All four appellants challenged their convictions through the present criminal appeals.
Contentions of the Appellants:
The learned counsel for the appellants argued that the conviction was based entirely on a single written dying declaration, the reliability of which was questionable. It was submitted that the doctor who certified the deceased’s mental fitness at the time of recording the statement was not examined, and the Executive Magistrate who recorded it did not personally certify her fitness.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned State counsel submitted that the prosecution had proven the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. It was argued that the dying declaration and testimonies of supporting witnesses were sufficient to establish cruelty for dowry and causation of death within seven years of marriage.
Observations of the Court:
The Court found that the first two ingredients of Section 304-B IPC, unnatural death and within seven years of marriage, were satisfied. However, it held that the essential requirement of proving cruelty or harassment "soon before death" for dowry was not fulfilled.
The Court noted that the written dying declaration lacked assurance of voluntariness and mental fitness. The Court observed that oral dying declaration is a weak kind of evidence and it can only be made the basis of conviction, if it inspires full confidence of the Court and if the Court is satisfied that the maker of the said oral dying declaration was in a fit state of mind at the time of making it and that it was not an outcome of tutoring, prompting or imagination, and where the dying declaration is suspicious and there is no other corroborative piece of evidence on record, it would be unsafe for the Court to record conviction on the solitary evidence of such oral dying declaration.
Decision of the Court:
The Chhattisgarh High, allowing the appeal, set aside the convictions of all appellants under Sections 304-B, 498-A, read with Section 34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Case Title: Vinay Kumar Pandey & Ors. vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS: 1306/2022, 1308/2022 & 866/2019
Advocate for the Appellants: Mr. Nishikant Sinha
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Ashish Shukla, Additional Advocate General
Picture Source :
