In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India delved into the crucial principles surrounding the admissibility and evidentiary weight of dying declarations. This judgment came as the apex court bench, consisting of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, rejected a criminal appeal by Rajendra S/O Ramdas Kolhe against the State of Maharashtra (Criminal Appeal No. 2281 of 2011).
Case Background
The case involved the heartbreaking death of Rekha Dhokne, a police constable who suffered severe burn injuries on July 22, 2002, in Ambajogai, Maharashtra. In her dying declaration (Exhibit 59), Rekha accused her husband, Rajendra Kolhe, and her brother-in-law, Suresh, of dousing her with kerosene and setting her on fire. Tragically, Rekha passed away two days later, on July 24, 2002.
The trial court found Rajendra Kolhe guilty under Section 302 (murder) read with Section 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, sentencing him to life imprisonment. The Bombay High Court upheld this conviction, dismissing Kolhe's appeal.
Key Legal Questions
The Supreme Court was primarily tasked with evaluating the admissibility and evidentiary value of Rekha's dying declaration. This involved a thorough examination of Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and numerous legal precedents.
The Verdict
After meticulously analyzing the evidence and legal principles, the Supreme Court affirmed Rajendra Kolhe's conviction and dismissed his appeal. The judgment included several critical observations:
1. Authenticity and Reliability of the Dying Declaration:
The court underscored that a dying declaration, once deemed authentic, credible, and free from external influence, can be the sole basis for conviction without needing corroboration. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan remarked, "Once such a conclusion is reached, a great deal of sanctity is attached to a dying declaration, and as said earlier, it can form the sole basis for conviction."
2. Careful Scrutiny of the Dying Declaration.
The court emphasized the necessity of rigorously scrutinizing a dying declaration to ensure it wasn't a result of external prompting, imagination, or that the deceased was not in a fit state to make the declaration.
3. Evidentiary Value:
Citing previous rulings, the court reiterated that a dying declaration holds a "sacrosanct status" in evidence, as it comes directly from the deceased victim. If the court is convinced of its veracity, it alone can be sufficient for a conviction.
4. Witness Testimony Discrepancies:
The court acknowledged minor inconsistencies and improvements in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses. However, it deemed these discrepancies insignificant, noting that such variations are natural given the passage of time since the incident.
This judgment reinforces the high regard and careful consideration the Indian judiciary places on dying declarations, reflecting their critical role in the pursuit of justice.
To get free legal advice:https://www.advotalks.com/
For More Legal Updates visit our youtube channel
.jpeg&w=80&h=80&crop-to-fit)
