Debangana Ray
Published on August 12, 2022 at 17:52 IST
A Division Bench of Calcutta High Court consisting of Justices Debangsu Basak and Bibhas Ranjan De, reiterated that dying declaration is a conclusive statement where corroboration is not required if the deceased is in a ‘fit state of mind’.
The Court stated that a conviction could be made on the basis of a dying declaration. Corroboration is not an absolute principle of law but a rule of prudence.
Further, it was stated that other evidence put forward would not be discarded due to loopholes in the investigation report. Further, acquittal will not be granted solely on the basis of a lapse in part of the prosecution when the complete record of evidence is against the accused.
The prosecution case filed under Sections 498-A and 302 of IPC mentioned that the accused repeatedly had quarrels with wife where he used to beat her and in the last events of quarreling, set her ablaze after pouring kerosene oil on her in the house where they resided.
The trial court found no fault in the prosecution’s case and convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 of IPC based on the dying declaration and other evidence even though there was infirmity found in investigation.
While relying on various cited cases, the heavy reliance was placed on the dying declaration to be the conclusive evidence for conviction to the present matter, the court relied on in Atbir v. Government of NCT of Delhi, wherein the following parameters were enlisted for considering dying declaration by the Apex Court:
(i) Dying Declaration can be the sole basis of conviction if it inspires the full confidence of the court.
(ii) The court should be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind at teh time of making the statement and that it was not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination.
(iii) Where the court is satisfied that the declaration is true and voluntary, it can base its conviction without any further corroboration.
(iv) It cannot be laid down as an absolute rule of law that the dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. The rule requiring corroboration is merely a rule of prudence.
(v) Where the dying declaration is suspicious, it should not be acted upon without corroborative evidence.
(vi) A dying declaration which suffers from infirmity such as the deceased was unconscious and could never make any statement cannot form the basis of conviction.
(vii) Merely because a dying declaration does not contain all the details to the occurrence, it is not to be rejected.
(viii) Even if it is a brief statement, it is not to be discarded.
(ix) When the eyewitness affirms that the deceased was not in a fit and conscious state to make the dying declaration, medical opinion cannot prevail.
(x) If after careful scrutiny, the court is satisfied that it is true and free from any effort to induce the deceased make a false statement and if it is coherent and consistent, there shall be no legal impediment to make it the basis of conviction, even if there is no corroboration.