Noting that a dying declaration taken days after the incident cannot be wholly reliable as chances of it being influenced or tutored are highly likely, the Supreme Court acquitted a man charged under dowry harassment case.
In the recent judgment passed, the Supreme Court also questioned the impugned order passed by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court for its inconsistency, as it raised doubts about the same dying declaration being reliable for one accused but not for the appellant.
The three-judge bench of Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra highlighted the critical role of evidence, particularly the dying declaration, and the burden of proof in cases related to dowry death. It also underscored the need for clear and reliable evidence to establish criminal charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
Brief Facts of the Case:
The case revolves around the marriage of the deceased (wife) and the appellant, Phulel Singh. After their marriage, the prosecution alleged that the appellant and his family harassed the deceased due to insufficient dowry. It was contended that the appellant had demanded dowry from the deceased's family, and they had already given cash, a scooter, and gold ornaments to the appellant and his family as part of the dowry. On November 5, 1991, the deceased suffered burn injuries under circumstances that led to her admission to a hospital in Ludhiana. It was alleged that the appellant had set her on fire using kerosene. The prosecution's case mainly relied on a dying declaration made by the deceased. In this declaration, the deceased accused the appellant of pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire. Relatives of the deceased, including her brother, Pavitar Singh (PW-3), and her father, Randhir Singh (PW-4), were witnesses.
They alleged that the deceased had informed them of the harassment she faced in her marital home due to dowry demands. Following the incident, an investigation was conducted, and charges were framed against the appellant and others under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Section 304-B (related to dowry death) and Section 307 (attempt to murder). The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 304-B of the IPC and sentenced him to seven years of rigorous imprisonment. The case was subsequently appealed to the High Court, which partially upheld the conviction. The appellant challenged the High Court's decision in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court examined the reliability of the dying declaration, the evidence of dowry harassment, and the High Court's decision.
Observation by the Court:
The court expressed doubts about the reliability of the dying declaration. It noted that the declaration had been recorded several days after the incident and raised concerns that it might have been influenced or tutored by the deceased's relatives. The court found discrepancies in the timing of the declaration and the medical examination, which cast doubt on its authenticity. The court pointed out an inconsistency in the High Court's decision. While the High Court had acquitted the appellant's father of the charge under Section 304-B of the (IPC) based on the same dying declaration, it upheld the appellant's conviction.
The court questioned how the same declaration could be considered reliable for one accused but not for the appellant, which raised doubts about its credibility. The court observed that there was insufficient evidence to conclusively prove that the deceased had been harassed by the appellant and his family due to non-fulfilment of dowry demands. It noted that the allegations of harassment were vague and not supported by concrete evidence. The court concluded that the prosecution had not successfully proven harassment on account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand, which is a crucial element for a charge under Section 304-B of IPC. Without sufficient evidence to establish this harassment, the court found that the case under Section 304-B was not made out.
Decision of the Court:
The court allowed the appeal filed by the appellant. The judgment and order of conviction as recorded by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court in its impugned judgment were quashed and set aside. The appellant was acquitted of all the charges levelled against him. The bail bonds of the appellant were ordered to stand discharged.
Case Title: Phulel Singh V. State of Haryana
Case No. : Criminal Appeal No. 396 of 2010
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. J. B.R. Gavai, Hon’ble Mr. J.Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Hon’ble Mr. J. Mr. J.Prashant Kumar Mishra.
Citation: 2023 Latest Caselaw 752 SC
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
