The High Court of Delhi dismissed the State's leave petition for acquittal appealed against the trial court's order acquitting the respondent husband of murder, dowry death, and cruelty charges, finding no reason to interfere with the conviction findings or the rejection of the dying declaration.
Leave petition dismissed; acquittal of the respondent affirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~9
% Date of Judgment : 04.02.2016
STATE ..... Petitioner Through : Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP for State. SI Sandeep Kumar, PS – Ashok Vihar
versus
RAVI KUMAR VERMA .... Respondent Through : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Pandey and Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocates.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
CRL. M. A. 8515/2015
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 1 of 10
that in furtherance of his common intention, the deceased was subjected to cruelty, illegal demands of dowry were made, she was harassed and beaten frequently.
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 2 of 10
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 3 of 10
fulfil her demand of gold ring and gold chain . On one day i.e. 20th of day Kranti had made a telephone call to her daughter Seema that the accused Ravi his mother and Savitri were taunting her daughter that chain and ring was not given in the marriage. On 22.01.2013 in Sunder Lal Jain Hospital her daughter regain her conscious. According to the witness her daughter Kranti caught hold of her hand and she thought she wanted water and so she asked her if she wanted water i.e. pani chahiye on which she whispered to her in a very soft voice that she herself has not consumed the poison but it was forcibly administered to her. “Mummy mene nahi pee mujhe pilai gai hai.”
PW-12 further deposed that :
The sister-in-law of Kranti used to taunt my daughter by not bringing the dowry and gifts.
18. PW-19 Seema, sister of the deceased deposed that :
“On 26.01.2013 my sister regained her consciousness. She had told to my mother in a soft voice Mummy mene nahi pee mujhe pilai gai hai thereafter my sister again become unconscious and she did not regain her consciousness up to 28.01.2013. On 28.01.2013 at about 6 p.m. my sister died due to poison.”
PW-19 further deposed that :
“My statement was recorded on 22.01.2013 by SI Azad Singh. I have stated in my statement Ex.PW19/DX-1 that my sister used to tell me on telephone that her sister-in-law used to harass her that my parents did not given gold ring, chain to Ravi in the marriage and used to taunt her that Ravi has married in the house of beggers.”
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 4 of 10
“On the contrary the medical evidence on record does not show that the deceased Kranti had regained consciousness at any point of time after she became unconscious and throughout the period she remained admitted in the hospital she was unconscious till her death. Further, the husband of the deceased i.e. accused Ravi Kumar Verma was present in the Hospital throughout. I am sure if the deceased had regained consciousness the doctor on duty or some ward boy on duty would have been told about the same which is not the case.”
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 5 of 10
mother and sister of the deceased that the deceased who remained unconscious prior to the alleged statement and thereafter, ever regained consciousness.
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 6 of 10
conviction. Another three Judge Bench in the case of Koli Chunilal Savji v. State of Gujarat , reported at (1999) 9 SCC 562, has held that if the materials on record indicate that the deceased was fully conscious and was capable of making a statement, the dying declaration of the deceased could not be ignored merely because the Doctor had not made the endorsement that the deceased was in a fit statement of mind to make the statement. Since the decisions in the aforesaid two matters were somewhat contrary, the matter was referred to the Constitution Bench. In the case of Laxman v. State of Maharashtra , reported at (2002) 6 Supreme Court Cases 710. Paras 3 and 5 read as under:
“3. The juristic theory regarding acceptability of a dying declaration is that such declaration is made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death and when every hope of this world is gone, when every motive to falsehood is silenced, and the man is induced by the most powerful consideration to speak only the truth. Notwithstanding the same, great caution must be exercised in considering the weight to be given to this species of evidence on account of the existence of many circumstances which may affect their truth. The situation in which a man is on the death bed is so solemn and serene, is the reason in law to accept the veracity of his statement. It is for this reason the requirements of oath and cross-examination are dispensed with. Since the accused has no power of cross-examination, the courts insist that the dying declaration should be of such a nature as to inspire full confidence of the court in its truthfulness and correctness. The court, however has always to be on guard to see that the statement of the deceased was not as a result of either tutoring or promoting or a product of imagination. The court also must further decide that the deceased was in a fit state of mind and had the opportunity to observe and identify the assailant. Normally, therefore, the court in order to satisfy whether the deceased was in a fit
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 7 of 10
mental condition to make the dying declaration looks up to the medical opinion. But where the eyewitnesses state that the deceased was in a fit and conscious state to make the declaration, the medical opinion will not prevail, nor can it be said that since there is no certification of the doctor as to the fitness of the mind of the declarant, the dying declaration is not acceptable. A dying declaration can be oral or in writing and in any adequate method of communication whether by words or by signs or otherwise will suffice provided the indication is positive and definite. In most cases, however, such statements are made orally before death ensues and is reduced to writing by someone like a magistrate or a doctor or a police officer. When it is recorded, no oath is necessary nor is the presence of a magistrate is absolutely necessary, although to assure authenticity it is usual to call a magistrate, if available for recording the statement of a man about to die. There is no requirement of law that a dying declaration must necessarily be made to a magistrate and when such statement is recorded by a magistrate there is no specified statutory form for such recording. Consequently, what evidential value or weight has to be attached to such statement necessarily depends on the facts and circumstances of each particular case. What is essentially required is that the person who records a dying declaration must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind. Where it is proved by the testimony of the magistrate that the declarant was fit to make the statement even without examination by the doctor the declaration can be acted upon provided the court ultimately holds the same to be voluntary and truthful. A certification by the doctor is essentially a rule of caution and therefore the voluntary and truthful nature of the declaration can be established otherwise.
5. The court also in the aforesaid case relied upon the decision of this court in Harjeet Kaur v. State of Punjab case wherein the magistrate in his evidence had stated that he had ascertained from the doctor whether she was in a fit condition to make a statement and obtained an endorsement to that effect and merely because an endorsement was made not on the
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 8 of 10
declaration but on the application would not render the dying declaration suspicious in any manner. For the reasons already indicated earlier, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the observations of this court in Paparambaka Rosamma and Ors. v. State of A.P. (at SCC P. 701, para 8) to the effect that
has been too broadly stated and is not the correct enunciation of law. It is indeed a hyper-technical view that the certification of the doctor was to the effect that the patient is conscious and there was no certification that the patient was in a fit state of mind specially when the magistrate categorically stated in his evidence indicating the questions he had put to the patient and from the answers elicited was satisfied that the patient was in a fit state of mind whereafter he recorded the dying declaration. Therefore, the judgment of this court in Paparambaka Rosamma and Ors. v. State of A.P. must be held to be not correctly decided and we affirm the law laid down by this court in Koli Chunilal Savji and Anr. v. State of Gujarat case.”
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 9 of 10
the respondent. He arranged for money and ensured that the best treatment was possible from a private hospital.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
G.S.SISTANI, J
FEBRUARY 04, 2016/ sc
CRL.L.P. 488/2015
Page 10 of 10
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the leave petition seeking condonation of delay and setting aside the acquittal of the respondent husband has merit.
Whether the testimony of the mother and sister of the deceased regarding the dying declaration and dowry harassment is sufficient to conclude prosecution guilt.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's finding that the deceased did not regain consciousness to make a valid dying declaration.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Paparambaka Rosamma v. State of A.P.Distinguished¶56
(1999) 7 SCC 695 · Who else cites this
Koli Chunilal Savji v. State of GujaratExplained¶56
(1999) 9 SCC 562 · Who else cites this
Laxman v. State of MaharashtraDistinguished¶56
(2002) 6 Supreme Court Cases 710
Harjeet Kaur v. State of PunjabReferred¶64
Harjeet Kaur v. State of Punjab
2 provisions across 2 enactments
State
Ravi Kumar Verma
G.S. Sistani
Sangita Dhingra Sehgal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
