Holding

A dying declaration is admissible and reliable if the deceased was in a fit condition and the statement specifically names the accused, and procedural lapses in recording do not per se render it inadmissible.

Summary

The State of Rajasthan appealed the acquittal of Parmendra Singh, who had been convicted of murder, dowry death and related offences under the IPC based largely on the victim's dying declarations. The Rajasthan High Court set aside the conviction, holding that the dying declarations were unreliable because the procedural requirements under police regulations were not observed and the victim was not fit to speak. The Supreme Court examined the admissibility of the four dying declarations, noting that the last declaration was recorded by a doctor who affirmed the victim's fitness, and that each statement specifically named the accused and described his role. The Court held that mere non‑observance of police procedure does not render a dying declaration suspect and that there was no evidence of tutoring or prompting. Consequently, the High Court's acquittal was reversed, the conviction reinstated, and the appeal allowed.

Issues considered

Whether a dying declaration is inadmissible if recorded without strict compliance with police regulations.
Whether the deceased was in a fit condition to make a dying declaration.
Whether variations among multiple dying declarations affect their reliability.
Whether there is any indication of tutoring or prompting in the dying declarations.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 120-B, s. 201, s. 302, s. 34, s. 498-A

Subjects

dying declarationadmissibilityevidencepolice proceduremurderdowry deathIndian Penal CodeSupreme Court

Judgment

[2009] 7 S.C.R. 405

...... \ STATE OF RAJASTHAN A
V.
PARMENDRA SINGH
... Criminal Appeal No. 183 of 2003
MAY 4, 2009
B
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK--KUMAR
GANGULY, JJ.]
.._ i
Evidence: Dying declaration - Acquittal by High Court
on the ground that dying declarations were not reliable -
Correctness of - Held: Not correct - In a/I dying declarations c
name of accused was specifically mentioned and role played
by him was categorically discussed.
The High Court reversed the order of conviction and
acquitted the accused on the ground that the dying
declarations were not reliable. Hence the appeal by State. D
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD:1. The High Court observed that the first dying
declaration was to be disbelieved on the ground that there
was no endorsement that the deceased was in a fit E
condition to give statement. Mere non-observance of the
. procedure indicated does not render the dying declaration
.,.. suspect. So far as the first dying declaration is concerned,
;,..
it was recorded at about 3.00 p.m. and the incident took

- place around 2.00 p.m. The first dying declaration was
recorded by the doctor. The,second was recorded by the F
SHO. Third was recorded by the Sub-Inspector in the
presence of doctor and two others. Finally, the fourth
dying declaration was recorded before (PW-13) ADM and
Assistant Collector in the presence of doctor. In the last
dying declaration it was noted by the doctor that the G
__,_ ... patient was in a fit condition to give statement. [Para 4]
[407 -G-H; 408-A-D]
Laxman v State of Maharashtra 2002 (6) SCC 710 - relied on.
405 H
~
406 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009] 7 S.C.R.

A 2. There is no material to show that the dying
declarations were the result of tutoring or prompting. In
all the dying declarations, the respondent was specifically
named, and the role played by him was categorically
described. That being so, the High Court was not justified
B in directing acquittal. [Paras 5, 6] [408-E-F]

Case Law Reference

2002 (6) sec 11 o relied on Para 4

C CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal
No. 183 of 2003
From the Judgement and Order dated 21.08.2001 of the
Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur in D.S. Crl. Appeal
No. 474 of 1998
D Manish Singhvi, AAG, Milind Kumar, Sandeep Bajaj, for
the Appellant.
Doongar Singh, V.J. Francis, Anupam Mishra, for the
Respondent.
E
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by

DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division
Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, directing acquittal
F of the respondent who faced trial alongwith two others namely,
Smt. Keshar Kanwar and Tara Devi. They faced trial for alleged
commission of offences punishable under Sections 302, 498-
A, 201, 12o~s of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC').
The trial Court acquitted the accused Keshar Kanwar from the
G charges relatable to Section 498-A, 302/34, 201/34 and 120-B
IPC. The accused Tara Devi was acquitted from the charges
under Section 498-A and 120-B. Respondent Parmendra Singh
was acquitted from the charges under Sections 120-B and 201
read with Section 34 IPC but he was sentenced to undergo life
H
•
STATE OF RAJASTHAN V. PARMENDRA SINGH. 407
[DR ARfJIT PASAYAT, J.]
+-,. imprisonment and three years RI for the offences punishable A
under Section 302 and 498-A IPC respectively.

) 2. Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows:
~
~ On 1st February, 1992 Dr. Khushiram Tewani (PW-30) was
working at the post of Medical Officer, lncharge at Primary Health B
Centre, Bagaur. In the afternoon on that day S.H.O., Bagaur
brought Lalita, wife of respondent in burnt and unconscious
..__..,
condition for medical treatment. Lalita was admitted in. the
'
_.,
Primary Health Centre by him and initial treatment was given to
her. In this regard, a slip Ex.Pc58 was prepared. Lalita's body c
was received with more than 80% burn injuries and considering
her condition he could not give her medical treatment due to
lack of resources. Therefore, within half an hour she was referred
to District Hospital, Bhilwara. According to Ex.P-58 at 3.05 in
the afternoon Lalita was brought before him.
~ D
There were several stat ments of the deceased which were
"' treated as dying declarations.
-(
The trial Court found the accused guilty,. convicted and
sentenced as noted above basing on the dying declarations.
E
In appeal, the High Court directed acquittal primarily on
the ground that the dying declarations were not reliable. The
~
Police Regulation relating to re~ording of dying declaration was
violated and the deceased was not in a position to give her
statement. It was noted that there was great variation between F
the dying declarations. There were four dying declarations in
fact.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant-State submitted that
in all the dying declarations name of the husband was mentioned
__.
and in all the four dying declarations the role played by the mother G
~J--+ was also described except one where the fathercin-law was
named. Learned counsel for the respondent supported the
judgment of the High Court.
4. It is to be noted that the High Court observed that the
H

•.
408 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 7 S.C.R.

A first dying declaration was to be disbelieved on the ground that
....
. there was no endorsement that the deceased was in a fit
condition to give statement. The view expressed is clearly
contrary to what has been stated by this Court in Laxman v. State
of Maharashtra (2002 (6) SCC 71 O]. So far as the nqn
'- .
B observance of the procedure laid down in Police Regulation is
concerned, this court had occasion to deal with the nature of
the police guidelines. It was observed that mere non-observance
t _,.
of the procedure indicated does not render the dying declaration
suspect. So far as the first dying declaration is concerned, it
c was recorded at about 3.00 p.m. at PHC, Bagaur. The incident
was around 2.00 p.m. The first dying declaration was recorded
by the doctor (PW-30). The second was recorded by the SHO
(PW-28). Third was by the Sub-Inspector (PW-15) in the
presence of Dr. A.K. Mathur (PW-11) and two others. Finally,
the fourth dying declaration was recorded before S.S. Kothari
D ~
(PW-13) ADM City, Bhilwara and Puran Chand Gupta, Assistant ~
Collector, Bhilwara in the presence of Dr. Arvind Malhotra (PW-
12). In the last dying declaration it was noted by the doctor that
the patient was in a fit condition to give statement.

E 5. There is no material to show that the dying declarations
were the result of tutoring or prompting. In all the dying (

. declarations the respondent has been specifically named, and
the role played by him has been categorically described. -4

6. That being so, the High Court was not justified in
F directing acquittal. The same is set aside. Respondent shall '
surrender to custody forthwith to serve the remainder of sentence.
7. The appeal is allowed.

D.G. Appeal allowed.
+- ' -