SURESH CHANDRA JANAversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

                        [2017] 13 S.C.R. 1



                   SURESH CHANDRA JANA                                   A
                                 V.

            THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
                  (Criminal Appeal No. 31 of2008)
                         AUGUST 11,2017                                  B

       [N. V. RAMANA AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.J
      Penal Code, 1860:
      S. 302 - Acid attack - Death due to burn injuries - Earlier.
victim had been allegedly raped by accused 'P' - During pendency         c
of rape case, 'P' and one 'R 'allegedly threw acid at the victim - Her
neighbours took her to the hospital - Neither any written complaint
was filed to police, nor anyone from the hospital informed the police
about the incident - Victim requested PW-7 to write her complaint
and send the same to the police by registered post - Victim succumbed    D
to the burn injuries and died - No dying declaration was recorded
- Thereajier, case u!s.302 was registered - In rape proceedings, P ·
was acquitted by trial Court as victim was no more alive to adduce
evidence - However. in proceeding uls.302, trial court convicted
both the accused and sentenced 'P · to death and 'R · to R.l. for life
- Reference to the High Court for confirmation of death sentence         E
was rejected - Further, conviction of both 'P' and 'R 'was set aside
- On appeal. held: High Court adopted a casual approach in
appreciating the facts. circumstances and evidence of the case -
High Court allowed itself to be swayed by the fact that the FIR was
delayed by 23 days hut failed to appreciate the fact that the victim.
                                                                         F
had a moron husband and two little kids at home. and none of them
were able to go to police station and get FIR recorded - She had to
request PW-7 to write down her complaint and sent it to police by
registered post - Jn the circumstances, delay in lodging the FIR is
fully explained - Death of the victim on account of burn injuries
due to acid attack was well corroborated from the statement of the       G
doctors (PW-6 and PW-8) - Statement given by victim in the FIR
scribed by PW-7, should have been treated as her dying declaration
- The victim specifically memioned in her report about the motive
part of 'P ·. who allegedly raped her and that case was pending - It
is not correct approach to simply pick up the minor lapses of the
                                                                         H
2            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      (2017] 13 S.C.R.


A   investigation and acquit accused. particularly when the ring of truth
    is undisturbed,- High Court erred in holding ·p- not guilty -
    However. 'R ·had no motive to commit the crime. nor it can be said
    that he had common intention with 'P · to cause burn injuries with
    acid on victim - View of the High Court to hold 'R ·not guilty cannot
    be said to he erroneous - Crime against Women.
B
           s. 302 - Murder - Two possible views - Accused 'P 'contended
    that where two views are possible and the courts below have taken
    different views, the view favouring the accused should be accepted
    - Held: Insofar the view taken by the High Court in not holding
    accused •p · gµilty is concerned, the same is not reasonably
c   possible view. for the reason that it is against the weight of the
    evidence on record ignoring completely the circumstances in which
    the victim reported the matter to police. with the help of a stranger
    and her statement in the FIR is fully corroborated, apart from
    medical evide~ce on record.
D         s. 302 - Murder - Reasonable doubt - It is not every doubt
    but only a reasonable doubt of which benefit can be given to the
    accused - A doubt of a timid mind which is afraid of logical
    consequences, cannot be said to be reasonable doubt - ff the
    benefits of all kinds of doubts raised on beha!f of the accused are
E   accepted. it will result in deflecting the course ofjustice - The
    cherished principles of golden thread of proof of reasonable doubt
    which runs through web of law should not be stretched morbidly to
    embrace every hunch, hesitancy and degree of doubt.
           Code o.f Criminal Procedure. 1973 - s.313 - Accused
F   contended that the evidence recorded in trial Court was not
    properly put Jo the accused uls.3 I 3 - Held: In instant case, the
    Court has complied with the provisions of s.313 - Suh-section (h)
    of s.3 I 3 requires the court to question the accused generally on the
    case after prtlsel~ttion evidence is over - It does not require that
    each and every sentence of the prosecution evidence has to be
G   re-1vritten anal read over once again vvhile exa1nining the accused
    u!s.313 of Cr.PC.
          Adminz:stration of Justice - Administration of Criminal
    Justice - Wol/ian allegedly raped by ·p' - During the pendency of
    the rape case, 'P ·and one 'R' threw acid at the victim - Although
H   she narrated the incident to the doctor. no written complaint was
 SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                           3
                     &ORS.

filed to police - Victim passed away due to shock and sepsis caused        A
by the acid attack - No dying declaration ·was recorded - Trial
Court convicted both accused and sentenced 'P' to death and 'R' to
R.I. for life - However, High Court dismissed the death reference
and acquitted the accused on hyper technical grounds of delay
and /aches in investigation and prosecution - Held (per N. V. Romana,      B
J.): A woman was raped and subsequently puni.shed for raising
 voice which ultimately led to her demise - The criminal justice
 system has not served the deceased from being victimized - It is
 admitted by the trea!ing doctor that I. 0. had requested for
 recording a dying declaration, which was not allowed by him and
 proper case history was also not maintained - The conduct of the          C
 doctor needs to be evaluated in light of his utter disregard for
 professionalism -Another aspect is regarding the defective
 investigation and prosecution - If a negligent investigation or
 omissions or lapses due to perfunctory investigation, are not
 effectively rectified, the faith and confidence of the people in the      D
 law enforcing agency would be shaken - The basic requirement
 that a trial must be fair is crucial for any civilised criminal justice
 system - Every stakeholder in this criminal justice system is
 expected to act with a sense offairness to bring out the truth so that
 punishment can be meted to those who deserve - Ethics - Medical
 - Indian Medical Council (Professional conduct, etiquette and             E
 ethics) Regulations, 2002 - Evidence - Dying Declaration.
       Disposing of the appeals, the Court
       HELD:
       Per Prafulla C. Pant. J.:                                           F
       1. The High Court has aiiowed itself to be swayed by the
fact that the First Information Report in the present case is delayed
by twenty three days but it has failed to appreciate the fact that
the helpless woman, who was admitted by the neighbours in the
hospital, had a moron husband and two little kids at home, and G
none of them were able to go to police station and get the First
Information Report recorded. The record clearly shows that the
deceased, in pathetic condition, has taken help of PW-7, who had
come in the hospital to see his patient, and she requested him to
write down her complaint and send it to police by registered post.
The said witness (PW-7) appears to have done only this much H
4            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      [2017] 13 S.C.R.


A   favour to the victim that he wrote down her complaint, got her
    L.T.l put on the complaint and sent it by ordinary post to the
    police, which a!lmittedly was received by the police. PW-2, the
    neighbour, has turther disclosed that when the victim cried and
    she told that the accused had thrown acid on her, he took the
    victim to the hospital. He has further stated that on way to hospital,
B
    the victim was first taken to the Police Station but the police
    advised him to take the victim to the Hospital. It appears from
    the record that after the victim was admitted in the hospital,
    neighbours did not bother to see her. In the circumstances, the
    delay in lodging the First Information Report is fully explained
c   on the record. [Para 14] [16-D-H; 17-A]
          2. It has come in the statement of PW-7, the scribe of the
    report, and that of PW-11 Inspector who received the written
    complaint by post and endorsed it to PW-9 Sub Inspector to
    investigate, that the envelope in which the complaint was received
D   was not on the record. PW-11 Inspector has further stated that
    the envelope got misplaced. Merely for said lapse of not
    producing the ~nvelope on the part of the investigating agency is
    not sufficient i11 the present case to create reasonable doubt in
    the prosecution story. It is almost impossible to come across a
    single case where the investigation was completely flawless or
E   absolutely fool11roof. The function of the criminal court is to find
    out the truth and it is not the correct approach to simply pick up
    the minor lapses of the investigation and acquit the accused,
    particularly w,hen the ring of truth is undisturbed. [Para 15]
    [17-8-D]
F         3. It is not every doubt but only a reasonable doubt of
    which benefit can be given to the accused. A doubt of a timid
    mind which is afraid of logical consequences, cannot be said to
    be reasonable doubt. The accused is entitled to get benefit of
    only reasonable doubt, i.e. the doubt which rational thinking man
G   would reasonably, honestly and conscientiously entertain and not
    the doubt of a vacillating mind that has no moral courage and
    prefers to take shelter itself in a vain and idle scepticism. The
    administration of justice has to protect the society and it cannot
    ignore the victim altogether who has died and cannot cry before
    it. If the benefits of all kinds of doubts raised on behalf of the
H
SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                       5
                    & ORS.

accused are accepted, it will result in deflecting the course of A
justice. The cherished principles of golden thread of proof of
reasonable doubt which runs through web of our law should not
be stretched morbidly to embrace every hunch, hesitancy and
degree of doubt. [Para 16] (17-E-H]
      4. Death of the victim on account of burn injuries suffered     B
by her due to acid attack gets corroborated not only from the
statement of PW-6 who attended her in the hospital, but also from
the statement of PW-8 who conducted post mortem examination
and opine!1 that the deceased had died of shock and sepsis. He
has further mentioned in his report (Exh. 5) about the ante mortem
chemical burn injuries on the body of the deceased. [Para 17]         c
(18-A-B]
       5. As far as not recording of dying declaration is concerned,
the High Court has failed to appreciate the fact that PW-9 Sub
Inspector has specifically stated that he die! make an attempt to
record the dying declaration of the victim, but the Medical Officer D
of the Hospital advised him that there was no need to record the
dying declaration as the patient was recovering. This fact gets
corroboration from the statement of PW-6 who has admitted that
he opined that there was no need of dying declaration recorded
as the patient was responding well to the treatment. The said E
fact is on the record in Exh. 3. In the circumstances of the case,
the statement of the victim, given by her in the First Information
Report (Exh. 4) scribed by PW-7 should have been treated as
her dying declaration. PW-7 has proved the left thumb impression
put by the victim on the complaint before it was sent to the police
by post. This witness has underwent cross-examination and F
nothing has come out which creates doubts in his testimony. The
victim has specifically mentioned in her report about the motive
on the part of the accused 'P' who had allegedly raped her and
case was pending. The prosecution story given in the F.I.R also
gets corroboration from the statement of PW-1, nephew of the G
victim. (Para 18] (18-C-F]
      6. So far as variation in time mentioned in the charge framed
is concerned, it is only when prejudice is caused to the accused
in defending himself, the benefit of such defect can be given to
the accused. Section 215 of the Code of Criminal Procedure            H
6           SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    [2017] 13 S.C.R.



A provides that no error in stating either the offence or the
  particulars required to be stated in the charge, and no omission
  to state the offence of those particulars shall be regarded at any
  stage of the case as material unless the accused was in fact misled
  by such error or omission and it has occasioned a failure of justice.
  The High Courl appears to have taken a view which is contrary
B
  to the provision contained in Section 215 read with illustration
  (d) of that SeQtion and Section 464 of the Code of Criminal
  Procedure. [P'ra 201 [19-A-C)
         7. In the present case, neither the spirit of Section 313 is
  forgotten, nor it can be said that the court has not complied with
c said provision. Sub-section (b) of Section 313 requires the court
  to question the '1ccused generally on the case after the prosecution
  evidence is ov~r. It does not require to re-write hundred pages
  evidence in another hundred pages to record the statement of
  the accused unf!er the Section. It should be borne in mind that
D entire   evidence has been recorded in the presence of the accused
  or his counsel, and before he enters into his defence, what is
  required is that he is generally asked on the case, after the
  prosecution evidence is over, to explain any circumstances in
  the evidence against him. It does not require that each and every
  sentence of the prosecution evidence has to be re-written and
E read over one~ again while examining the accused under Section
  313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. [Para 211 [19-D-FI
          8. From the evidence on record, the view taken by the High
  Court so far 's it relates to accused 'P' is concerned, the same
  is not reasonably possible view, for the reason that it is against
F the weight of the evidence on record ignoring completely the
   circumstances in which the victim reported the matter to police,
   with the help IJf a stranger and that her statement in the F.I.R is
   fully corroborated from the statements of PW-1, PW-2 and PW-7,
   apart from the medical evidence on record. [Para 221 [19-G-H;
G 20-AI
          9. So fat as the conviction of accused 'P' is concerned, the
   High Court has erred in holding him not guilty. The charge of
   offence punishable under Section 302 IPC is fully established on
   the record as 1against accused 'P' as found by the trial court. So
   far as 'R' is concerned, undoubtedly he had no motive to commit
H
 SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                     7
                            &ORS.

the crime, nor is it found that he was having acid with him, as     A
such, it cannot be said that he had any common intention with
accused 'P' to cause burn injuries with acid on the victim. It is
possible that he might have accompanied accused 'P' to
pressurize the victim to withdraw the rape case against him as he
was witness in said case. As such, taking such fact into
                                                                    B
consideration by the High Court to hold him not guilty beyond
reasonable doubt cannot be said to be erroneous. [Para 23)
(20-B-D]
       10. Insofar as quantum of sentence is concerned, it is settled
law that life imprisonment is the rule and the death sentence is
an exception, and the death sentence can be imposed only when c
life imprisonment appears to be altogether inadequate punishment
in the relevant circumstances of the crime. In the present case,
there is no criminal history of the accused 'P' and there is no
evidence that he is a continuing threat to the society. Considering
the fact that meanwhile accused 'P' has been acquitted of the D
rape charge by the trial court, on the charge of murder, awarding
sentence of imprisonment for life and direction to pay fine of
Rs.10,000/- failing which to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
further period of two years to the accused 'P' would meet the
ends of justice. [Para 24) (20-E-G)
                                                                    E
      Per N. V. Ramana. J. (Concurring):
      1. Usually vitriolage or acid attack has transformed itself
as a gender based violence. Acid attacks not only cause damage
to the physical appearance of its victims but also cause immense
psychological trauma thereby becoming a hurdle in their overall
                                                                     F
development. Although acknowledging the seriousness of the
acid attack laws were amended in 2013, yet the number of acid
attacks are on the rise. Moreover this Court has been passing
various orders to restrict the availability of corrosive substance
in the market which is an effort to nip this social evil in the bud.
It must be recognized that having stringent laws and enforcement G
agencies may not be sufficient unless deep-rooted gender bias is
removed from the society. [Para 5) [22-E-G)
     2. The deceased was admitted to the hospital on 27.10.1998
and she died on 23.11.1998. For 26 days she was struggling
between life and death in the hospital and there was no dying       H
8            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      [2017] 13 S.C.R.


A   declaration recorded. It is specifically admitted by the treating
    doctor that the ~.O. had requested for recording a dying declaration
    which was not allowed by him as he thought that she was
    responding well to the treatment but at the same time he admits
    that the gener~I condition of the patient was very poor. Further
    he admits that she was not examined before tendering such
B
    opinion and proper case history was also not maintained.
    Therefore the conduct of the doctor (PW 6) needs to be evaluated
    in light of his utter disregard for professionalism. In criminal
    cases, doctors inevitably play a very important role, they have a
    bounden duty ,to maintain professionalism in assessing situation
c   and arranging for a dying declaration to be recorded. Moreover
    he should have strictly maintained the case record which is very
    crucial for sµccessful prosecution. Such good practice, of
    maintenance of record, is made part of the Indian Medical Council
    (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002.
    [Para 6) [22-Q; 23-A-C)
D
          3. Every stakeholder in this criminal justice system is
    expected to ac~ with a sense of fairness to bring out the truth so
    that punishment can be meted to those who deserve. Although
    courts are provided with the duty to dispense justice, it cannot
E   be denied that effective dispensation of justice by the courts in
    this country requires support of all the stakeholders. In light of
    the above, every stakeholder is expected to be aware of their
    responsibility 1and work towards achieving ends of the criminal
    justice system, [Para 8) [24-B-C]

F         4. If a pegligent investigation or omissions or lapses, due
    to perfunctory investigation, are not effectively rectified, the faith
    and confidence of the people in the law enforcing agency would
    be shaken. Tlterefore the police have to demonstrate utmost
    diligence, seriousness and promptness. [Para 9) [24-D]
G         5. The t,asic requirement that a trial must be fair is crucial
    for any civilized criminal justice system. It is essential in a society
    which recognizes human rights and is based on values such as
    freedoms, the, rule of law, democracy and openness. The whole
    purpose of the trial is to convict the guilty and at the same time
H
 SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                   9
                    & ORS.

to protect the innocent. In this process courts should always be   A
in search of the truth and should come to the conclusion, based
on the facts and circumstances of each case, without defeating
the very purpose of justice. [Para 10] [24-E-F]

     Paniben (Smt.) v. State of Gujarat (1992) 2 SCC 474 :
     [1992] 2 SCR 197 ; Munnu Raja and Anr. v. State of            B
     Madhya Pradesh (1976) 3 SCC 104 : [1976] 2 SCR
     764 ; State of U.P. v. Ram Sagar Yadav and Ors.
     (1985) 1 SCC 552 : [1985] 2 SCR 621 ; Ramawati
     Devi v. State of Bihar (1983) 1 SCC 211 ; Gajula
     Surya Prakasrao v. State of Andhra Pradesh                    c
     (2010) 1 SCC 88 : [2009] 15 SCR 789 ; State of
     Gujarat v. Hasmukh @ Bhikha Gova Harijan (1996) 1
     GLR 292 ; Muniammal v. The Superintendent of Police,
     Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram, (Decision of
     Madras High Court in Criminal Original Petition
     No. 12582 of 2007) ; Dr. lndrajit Khandekar v. Union          D
     of India and Ors.(Decision of High Court of
     Judicature at Bombay : Nagpur bench) in W.P. No.
     4974 of 2012) ; Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar &
     Ors.(1998) 4 SCC 517 : [1998] 2 SCR 1097
     - referred to.                                                E

                      Case Law Reference

      (1992] 2 SCR 197       referred to        Para 7

      [1976] 2 SCR 764       referred to        Para 7             F

      [1985] 2 SCR 621       referred to        Para 7

      (1983) 1 sec 211       referred to        Para 7

      [2009] 15 SCR 789      referred to        Para 7             G

      (1996) 1 GLR 292       referred to        Para 8

      [1998] 2 SCR 1097      referred to        Para 9

                                                                   H
10            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2017] 13 S.C.R.



A          CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
     No. 31 of 2008.

           From the Jud~ent and Order dated 16.02.2006 of the High Court
     of Judicature at Calcutta in Death Reference No.4 of2005 with C.R.A.
     No.599 of2005
B
                                       WITH
           CriminalApweal No. 32 of2008.
          Rana Mukh~rjee, Sr. Adv., S. K. Bhattacharya, Niraj Bobby
   Paonam, Tomthinnganbi Koijam, Raja Chatterjee, Chanchal Kumar
C Ganguli, R. Bhunya,AdeelAhmed,Anip Sachthey, Parijat Sinha, V. N .
  .Raghupathy, Dipalq Kumar Jena, Ms. Minakshi Ghosh, Manish Kumar,
   J. Das, Advs. for the appearing parties.
           The Judgmeµts of the Court were delivered by
           PRAFULLA C. PANT, J. I. These appeals are directed against
D    judgment and order dated 16.02.2006, passed by the High Court at
     Calcutta in Death [Reference No. 4 of 2005 and Criminal Appeal No.
     599 of2005 whereby the Death Reference was rejected, and the appeal
     of the convicts was allowed, their conviction and sentence recorded by
     the Additional Se~sions Judge, Fast Track (l" Court), Contai, against
E    accused respondents in Sessions Case No. LV/March/2004 in respect
     of offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (IPC)
     was set aside, and I they were acquitted of the charge.
            2. Before th!l incident in question, the hapless woman (deceased
     in the present casF) had complained that she was raped by accused-
F    respondent Purnendu Kumar Patra on 28.04.1997. She complained the
     matter to Panchayat, and when no action was taken, on 26.09.1997 she
     lodged a First Information Report against the aforesaid accused person,
     and a case in respect of offence punishable under Section 376 IPC. was
     registered against him. The victim got her statement recorded under
     Section 164 ofCoqe of Criminal Procedure before the Judicial Magistrate,
G    Third Court, Contai.
           3. In order to teach lesson to the victim, in the intervening night of
     26.09.1998 and 27!.09.1998 .• two persons including the aforesaid accused
     Purncndu·Kumar Patra knocked her door and when she came out, acid
     was thrown at her. She cried for help. Her husband was moron who
H
 SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                                11
           & ORS. [PRAFULLA C. PANT.• J.]

was of little help. She had two little kids in the house. The neighbours,       A
who rushed to the spot, stated to have taken the victim first to the police
station and thereafter took the deceased to Sub Divisional Hospital,
Contai, where she was admitted for the treatment. No written complaint
appears to have been given to the police at that point of time. At the time
of her admission in the hospital, she said to have disclosed to the attending   B
doctor PW-6 B. Debroy the names of the two accused, namely Pumendu
Kumar Patra and Rabin Jana as the two persons who came to her house.
It appears that no one from the hospital bothered to inform to the police
about the incident. Since there was no relative of hers in the hospital, on
31.10.1998 she requested PW-7 Joyram Jana (who used to live nearby
Contai Sub Divisional Hospital and happened to have come to the hospital        C
to see some other patient), to write her complaint and send the same to
the police by registered post. English translation ofher written complaint
(original in Bangla), which is Exh. 4, is reproduced below: -
       "To
       The O/c,                                                                 D
       Contai P.S.
       District: Midnapore.
       Sir,
            This is my humble submission that I, Smt. Saraswati Guchhait
       W/o Sri Niranjan Guchhait, am resident ofKaralda Nimakbarh,              E
       P.S. Kanthi (Contai), Dist. Midnapore.
           On 27.10.1998 (English equivalent) when I was injured with
       acid, hurled at me by under mentioned two miscreants, I went to
       your Police Station and thereafter as instructed atthe Police Station
       I am now admitted to bed no. 33 (female) at Kanthi Sub-Divisional        F
       Hospital. My husband is mentally a very nitWit person, in a sense
       almost mentally handicapped. The miscreant no. I had raped me,
       and the case no. GR. 756/97 against him is pending. As these
       two persons are very terrorizing in nature, due to fear, none of my
       relatives and neighbours are ready to go to the police station. On
       Thursday, 29. l 0.1998 (English equivalent) at 7 .00 p.m. the under      G
       mentioned two miscreants brought another person unknown to
       me to my bed (in the hospital), got identified me to him. They said
       which I heard- 'we are talking about this Maal (slang). Can you
       do it?' Then those three persons immediately went out of the
       room.                                                                    H
12      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2017] 13 S.C.R.



A    Now, I am much frightened, these persons may cause me harm
     at any tillje. As I am bed ridden, I could not inform the police
     station about this. As I am illiterate, I requested a person to write
     this com~aint and send it to you through registered post (sic.)
     Accordin$ to my request he wrote this, read it to me and made
     me put down my L.T.L
B
     God knows whether this complaint would reach you or not. If
     you receive this statement, then for God's sake, kindly take at
     least some steps against these miscreants so that life of a helpless
     woman c9uld be saved from these terrible miscreants and great
c    justice dcine to me. It is humbly submitted.

     Dated: 31.10.1998

         THE NAMES OF THE MISCREANTS

     Purnendq Kumar Patra s/o Late Bankim Chandra Patra of P.O.
D    Karalda, :Nimakbarh, P.S. Kanthi. District: Midnapore

     Rabin Jai;ia s/o Sri Satyananda Jana ofKaralda Nich, P.O. Karalda
     Nimakbarh, P.S. Kanthi, District: Midnapore.
     I read out the entire                        Yours humbly
E    descripti¢>n to the                    seeking favour L. T.L of
     applicant and made
     her understand                   Smt. Saraswati Guchhait by pen
                                            of Sri Joyram Jana
     Sd/- Sri Joyram Jana"
     4. The afpresaid report was sent by ordinary post by PW-7 Joyram
F
     Jana, who scribed it. The same reached at the Police Station,
     Contai on 07.11.1998. The following endorsement was made by
     the PW-11 Inspector Alok Kumar Ghosh, at the end of the
     complaint after it is received: -
        "Received through postal Oak today (7.11.98)
G       At 2~.00 hrs. and initiated Contai P.S. case no.
        227/98 dt. 7 .11.1998 u/s. 326/307 !PC
                                                    Sd/- Illegible
                                     Ole. Contai P.S. 7.11.98 Officer-
                                    In-charge Contai P.S., Midnapore."
H
  SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                              13
            & ORS. [PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.]

          5. PW-11 Inspector Alok Kumar Ghosh who made above A
  endorsement on the complaint, deputed PW-9 Sub- inspector Dibakar
  Bhattacharjee to investigate the matter. GR No. 798 of 1998 was
  registered. Shockingly no dying declaration of the victim was got
  recorded, as PW-6 Dr. B. Debroy, who was attending the victim, advised
  to the Investigating Officer that there was no need for the dying B
  declaration as the patient was responding well to the treatment. But the
  victim succumbed to the bum injuries and died on 23.11.1998, i.e. 26
  days after the incident. As such, t.'ie case appears to have been converted
  from offences punishable under Sections 326, 307 IPC to one under
  Section 302 IPC. The post mortem examination on the dead body was
  conducted by PW-8 Dr. Tapas Kumar Chatterjee who prepared the C
  autopsy report (Exh. 5) and opined that the deceased had died due to
  shock and sepsis. After investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted
  charge-sheet against accused-respondents namely Purnendu Kumar
  Patra and Rabin Jana for their trial in respect of offence punishable
  under Section 302 IPC.
                                                                                D
           6. The proceedings relating to earlier incident dated 26.09 .1997 in
  respect of offence of rape, arisen out of G.R. No. 756 of 1997, were
   pending at the time of death of the deceased. In said case which gave
   rise to S.T. No. 41 of2004, accused-respondent Pumendu Kumar Patra
  was acquitted during the pendency of this case on 07 .02.2012 by the
  trial court as the victim was no more alive to adduce evidence, and E
   witness of said case namely - Rabindra Nath Jana, (one of accused
   respondents in the present case) and few others turned hostile. Copy of
. s.aid order is annexed with the affidavit (Annexure RI) filed before this
  Court on behalf of accused-respondent Pumendu Kumar Patra.
        7. In the present case (arising out of G.R. No. 798of1998 relating     F
                                                                                    1
 to murder) when the charge framed and accused Purnendu Kumar Patra
 and Rabin Jana pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, the prosecution
 got examined PW-1 Dipak Kumar Guchhait (uncle of the deceased),
 PW-2 Sudha Krishna Jana (neighbour of the deceased), PW-3 Shambhu
 Ram Das, PW-4 Niranjan Guchhait, husband of the deceased (unable to           G
 understand questions and give answers), PW-5 Sudhir Ch. Maity, PW-6
 Dr. B. Debroy (who admitted the victim in the hospital), PW-7 Joyram
 Jana (scribe of the complaint), PW-8 Dr. Tapas Kumar Chatterjee (who
 conducted post mortem examination), PW-9 Sub Inspector Dibakar
 Bhattacharjee (Investigating Officer), PW-I 0 Sub Inspector Gopal
                                                                              .H
14             SUPR._f:ME COURT REPORTS                      (2017) 13 S.C.R.


A    Chakraborty (w)lo prepared the inquest report) and PW-11 Inspector
     Alok Kumar Ghosh. The evidence was put to the accused under Section
     313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, in reply to which they stated the
     same to be false, No evidence in defence appears to have been adduced
     on behalf of the accused persons. The trial court after hearing the
     parties found b<1>th the accused guilty of charge of offence punishable
B
     under Section 302 !PC and after hearing on sentence, accused-
     respondent Purrlendu Kumar Patra was sentenced to death by directing
     him to be hang11d by neck until his death subject to confirmation by the
     High Court of Calcutta, and co-accused Rabin Jana was sentenced to
     rigorous impris<!>nment for life and directed to pay fine ofRs.25,000/-, in
c    default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years.
     Reference was made by the trial court to the High Court for confirmation
     of death senten¢e. Both the convicts preferred criminal appeal against
     the order passtld by the trial court. The High Court disposed of the
     Reference and the appeal filed by the convicts by a common order,
     impugned befote us, by which the Death Reference was rejected and
D
     the accused were acquitted. Aggrieved by the judgment of the High
     Court, appellant (brotherofthe deceased) filed Criminal Appeal No. 31
     of 2008 and the State of West Bengal has filed Criminal Appeal No. 32
     of2008 before this Court, through the Special Leave Petitions.
            8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
E    entire record.
           9. The High Court has acquitted the accused with the following
     observations: -
            " ...... .It is claimed on behalf of the prosecution that there was
F           strong motive behind the murder ofSaraswati Guchait. Since she
            filed a case alleging commission of rape on her by the appellant
            namely li'urnendu Kumar Patra, the appellants were biding for an
            opportune moment to get rid of the principal witness. In this
            connection it may be mentioned that the other appellant Rabin
            Jana was cited just as a witness in that case. There was apparently
G           no reason whatsoever for the witness to pour acid on Saraswati
            Guchait. The house in question wedged between the several
            houses. Her husband and sons were also inside her house at the
            time of the alleged incident. It is doubtful as to whether she was
            actually1called at late hours in the night. It is equally doubtful as
            to whettier she opened the door on receiving the call of a person
H
SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                               15
          & ORS. [PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.]

      who was alleged to have committed rape on her earlier. The              A
      story presented through P.W. l, P.W. 2, P.W. 3 and P.W. 5 is not
      believable. The statement of the principal witness are not
      consistent. Too much importance should not have been placed on
      the contradictory statements of the witnesses. Indifferent and
      nonchalance on part of the near relations, neighbours police officers   B
      and the doctors were not properly taken note of. Effort was
      made to entangle the appellants long after the alleged incident.
      No enquiry was conducted for ascertaining the reasons for her
      sustaining injury. The statement of the injured was not recorded
      either. There should not have been conviction and sentence on
      such 'unsatisfactory materials before the court. Added to it, were      C
      the defects in framing charges and examination of the appellants
      under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Tlie
      conviction and sentence is thus found not sustainable."
        10. On behalf of the appellant Suresh Chandra Jana, brother of
the deceased, Shri S.K. Bhattacharya, Advocate, submitted before us           D
that it is a case of total apathy coupled with the erroneous appreciation
of evidence by the High Court resulting in acquittal of perpetrators of
heinous crime of which a hapless poor lady, who had earlier been raped,
made to die by throwing acid on her. It is further submitted that the
accused-respondent Purnendu Kumar Patra, who had political patronage,
has been allowed by the High Court to get emboldened with little regard       E
for human dignity and honour. It is argued that a fault finding approach
adopted by the High Court is against the principles of doing justice to the
victim. The statements of witnesses were read over before us.
       11. Learned counsel for the State also argued on the same lines in
the separate appeal filed against the impugned order passed by the High       F
Court.
       12. On the other hand, Shri Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel
appearing on behalf of the accused-respondents, contended that where
two views are possible and the' courts below have taken different views,
the view favouring the accused should be accepted. He further pointed         G
out that in the present case the First Information Report is delayed by
twerity three days, and no dying declaration was got recorded though
the victim died after twenty six days of the incident, as such the High
Court did not err in rejecting the Death Reference made by the trial
court, and rightly acquitted the accused. It is also pointed out before us
                                                                              H
16             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2017] 13 S.C.R.


A    that even the envelope in which the complaint said to have been sent by
     post to the police, was not placed on record by the Investigating Officer.
     It is submitted on behalf of the accused-respondents that the time given
     in the charge fr~med was different than what is alleged by the
     prosecution. It is further submitted by Shri Mukherjee that the evidence
     recorded by the trial court was not properly put to the accused under
B
     Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Lastly, it is argued that
     accused-respondent Rabin Jana had no motive to commit the murder of
     the deceased.
            13. Having qeard the submissions ofleamed counsel for the parties
     and going through the record of the case, we are of the view that the
c    present case is an example of complete insensitiveness on the part of
     the police, the doctors and the system towards the victim. The High
     Court appears to II.ave adopted a casual approach in appreciating the
     facts, circumstances and evidence of the case, particularly, in a case
     where the trial coUI't has awarded capital punishment in a sensitive matter.
D            14. The High Court has allowed itself to be swayed by the fact
     that the First Information Report in the present case is delayed by twenty
     three days but it has failed to appreciate the fact that the helpless woman,
     who was admitted by the neighbours in the hospital, had moron husband
     and two little kids at home, and none of them were able to go to police
     station and get the' First Information Report recorded. Observations of
E
     the trial court while examining PW-4 Niranjan Gucchait that he is
     incapable to understand questions and answers, and he could not be
     examined, has been completely ignored by the High Court. It has come
     on the record in the evidence of PW-2 Sudha Krishna Jana as to how
     when neighbours i;ushed, he took the victim to the Hospital and got her
F    admitted there. The record clearly shows that the deceased, in pathetic
     condition, has taken help of PW-7 Joyram Jana, who had come in the
     hospital to see his patient, and she requested him to right down her
     complaint and send it to police by registered post. The said witness
     (PW-7) appears to have done only this much favour to the victim that he
G    wrote down her complaint, got her L.T.I put on the complaint and sent it
     by ordinary post tp the police, which admittedly was received by the
     police only on 07.11.1998. PW-2 Sudha Krishna Jana, the neighbour,
     has further disclosed that when the victim cried - "Moregalam" (I am
     dying) and she told that the accused had thrown acid on her, he took the
     victim to the hospital. He has further stated that on way to hospital, the
H    victim was frrst taken to Contai Police Station but the police advised him
 SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                             17
           & ORS. [PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.]

to take the victim to Contai Sub Divisional Hospital. It appears from the   A
record that after the victim was admitted in the hospital, neighbours did
not bother to see her. In the circumstances, we find that the delay in
lodging the First Information Report is fully explained on the record and
is fatal for the prosecution case.
       15. No doubt, it has come in the statement of PW-7 JoyramJana, B
the scribe of the report, and that of PW-11 Inspector Alok Kumar Ghosh,
who received the written complaint by post and endorsed it to PW-9 Sub
Inspector Dibakar Bhattacharjee to investigate, that the envelope in which
the complaint was received was not on the record. PW-II Inspector
Alok Kumar Ghosh has further stated that the envelope got misplaced.
In our opinion, merely for said lapse of not producing the envelope on c
the part of the investigating agency is not sufficient in the present case
to create reasonable doubt in the prosecution story. In our opinion, it is
almost impossible to come across a single case where the investigation
was completely flawless or absolutely foolproof. The function of the
criminal court is to find out the truth and it is not the correct approach to D
simply pick up the minor lapses ofthe investigation and acquit the accused,
particularly when the ring of truth is undisturbed.
        16. It may be mentioned that it is not every doubt but only a
reasonable doubt of which benefit can be given to the accused. A doubt
of a timid mind which is afraid of logical consequences, cannot be said E
to be reasonable doubt. The experienced, able and astute defence lawyers
do raise doubts and uncertainties in respect of evidence adduced against
the accused by marshalling the evidence, but what is to be borne in mind
is -whether testimony of the witnesses before the court is natural, truthful
in substance or not. The accused is entitled to get benefit of only
reasonable doubt, i.e. the doubt which rational thinking man would F
reasonably, honestly and conscientiously entertain and not the doubt of a
vacillating mind that has no moral courage and prefers to take shelter
itself in a vain and idle scepticism. The administration of justice has to
protect the society and it cannot ignore the victim altogether who has
died and cannot cry before it. If the benefits ofall kinds of doubts raised G
on behalf of the accused are accepted, it will result in deflecting the
course of justice. The cherished principles of golden thread of proof of
reasonable doubt which runs through web of our law should not be
stretched morbidly to embrace every hunch, hesitancy and degree of
doubt.
                                                                             H
18            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2017] 13 S.C.R.


A          17. Death of the victim on account of burn injuries suffered by
     her due to acid attack gets corroborated not only from the statement of
     PW-6 Dr. B. Debroy, who attended her in the hospital, but also from the
     statement df PW-8 Dr. Tapas Kumar Chatterjee, who conducted post
     mortem examination on 23 .11.1998 and opined that the deceased had
     died of shock and sepsis. He has further mentioned in his report (Exh.
B
     5) about tile ante mortem chemical bum injuries on the body of the
     deceased.
            18. A.s far as not recording of dying declaration is concerned, the
     High Court has failed to appreciate the fact that PW-9 Sub Inspector
     Dibakar Bhattacharjee has specifically stated that he did make an attempt
c    to record tlje dying declaration of the victim, but the Medical Officer of
     Contai Sub Divisional Hospital advised him that there was no need to
     record the dying declaration as the patient was recovering. This fact
     gets corrolloration from the statement of PW-6 Dr. B. Debroy who has
     admitted that he opined that there was no need of dying declaration
D    recorded as the patient was responding well to the treatment. The said
     fact is l'n the record in Exh. 3. In the circumstances of the case, the
     statement of the victim, given by her in the First Information Report
     (Exh. 4) scribed by PW-7 Joyram Jana, should have been treated as her
     dying deqlaration. PW-7 Joyram Jana has proved the left thumb
     impression put by the victim on the complaint before it was sent to the
E    police by post This witness has underwent cross-examination and nothing
     has come 'out which creates doubts in his testimony. The victim has
     specifically mentioned in her report about the motive on the part of the
     accused-respondent Purnendu Kumar Patra, who had allegedly raped
     her and case with G.R. No. 756of1997 was pending. The prosecution
F    story given in the F.LR also gets corroboration from the statement of
     PW-1 Dipak Kumar Guchhait, nephew of the victim.
            19. The victim has further stated in her complaint, which can be
     treated as dying declaration, that she did go to the police station after
     she was ii;ijured with acid hurled at her and police instructed that she be
G    taken to the hospital where she was admitted in bed No. 33 (female
     ward). However, in her complaint Exh.4, the deceased has not given
     any specific role to accused-respondent Rabin Jana, nor any motive
     appears to be on his part to take life of the victim. He was said to be a
     member of the Panchayat and the Panchayat had taken no action against
     Purnend1i1 Kumar Patra in connection with the earlier incident of alleged
H    rape whereafter she got lodged the report of said case.
 SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST .BENGAL                             19
           & ORS. [PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.]

      20. So far as variation in time mentioned in the charge framed is A
concerned, we are of the view that it is only when prejudice is caused to
the accused in defending himself, the benefit of such defect can be
given to the accused. Section 215 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
provides that no error in stating either the offence or the particulars
required to be stated in the charge, and no omission to state the offence
                                                                            B
of those particulars shall be regarded at any stage of the case as material
unless the accused was in fact misled by such error or omission and it
has occasioned a failure of justice. The High Court appears to have
taken a view which is contrary to the provision contained in Section 215
read with illustration ( d) of that Section and Sec.tion 464 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.                                                           c
       21. We have also perused the questions put under Section 313 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure and answers given by the accused which
are on the record. We do not find that in the present case spirit of
Section 313 is forgotten, nor it can be said that the court has not complied
with said provision. Sub-section (b) of Section 313 requires the court to D
question the accused generally on the case after the prosecution evidence
is over. It does not require to re-write hundred pages evidence in another
hundred pages to record the statement of the accused under the Section.
It should be borne in mind that entire evidence has been recorded in the
presence of the accused or his counsel, and before he enters into his
defence, what is required is that he is generally asked on the case, after E
the prosecution evidence is over, to explain any circumstances in the
evidence against him. It does not require that each and every sentence
of the prosecution evidence has to be re-written and read over once
again while examining the accused under Section 313 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.                                                          F
       22. So far as argument that when two views are possible, the
view favouring the accused should be accepted, is concerned, we have
carefully gone through the detailed judgment of the trial court discussing
every bit of evidence, and the one passed by the High Court, impugned
before us. In our considered opinion from the evidence on record, the         G
view taken by the High Court so far as it relates to accused Pumendu
Kumar Patra is concerned, the same is not reasonably possible view, for
the reason that it is against the weight of the evidence on record ignoring
completely the circumstances in which the victim reported the matter to
police, with the help of a stranger and that her statement in the F.LR is
                                                                              H
20             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2017] 13 S.C.R.



A    fully corroborated from the statements of PW-1 Dipak Guchhait, PW-2
     Sudha Krishna Jana and PW-7 Joyram Jana, apart from the medical
     evidence on record.
            23. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that so
     far as the conviction of accused-respondent Pumendu Kumar Patra is
B    concerned, the High Court has erred in holding him not guilty. In our
     opinion, the charge of offence punishable under Section 302 IPC is fully
     established on the record as against accused-respondent Pumendu Kumar
     Patra as found by the trial court. So far as accused-respondent Rabin
     Jana is concerned, undoubtedly he had no motive to commit the crime,
     nor is it founq that he was having acid with him, as such, it cannot be
c    said that he had any common intention with accused-respondent
     PurnenduKumar Patra to cause burn injuries with acid on the victim. It
     is possible that he might have accompanied Pumendu Kumar Patra to
     pressurize the victim to withdraw the rape case against him as he was
     witness in sai(i case. As such, taking such fact into consideration by the
D    High Court to hold him not guilty beyond reasonable doubt, cannot be
     said to be emmeous.
             24. Now we have to examine the question relating to quantum of
     sentence. The trial court has awarded the extreme penalty of death
     sentence against Pumendu Kumar Patra and the Death Reference has
E    been rejected by the High Court. It is settled law that life imprisonment
     is the rule and the death sentence is an exception, and the death sentence
     can be impo~ed only when life imprisonment appears to be altogether
     inadequate punishment in the relevant circumstances of the crime. In
     the present case, there is no criminal history of the accused Pumendu
     Kumar Patra, and there is no evidence that he is a continuing threat to
F    the society. Considering the fact that meanwhile Pumendu Kumar Patra
     has been acquitted of the rape charge by the trial court, as is evident
     from Annexllrc RI with the application filed on behalf of the accused,
     we are of the view that on the charge of murder, awarding sentence of
     imprisonmeqt for life and direction to pay fine ofRs. l 0,000/- failing which
G    to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two years to
     the accused Pumendu Kumar Patra would meet the ends of justice.
            25. Accordingly, both the appeals are partly allowed, and acquittal
     of accused-respondent Purnendu Kumar Patra by the High Court is set
     aside. The qonvlttion of said accused under Section 302 !PC, recorded
     by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, I" Court, Contai, is affirmed.
H
 SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                             21
                    & ORS.

He is sentenced to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. I 0,0001-, in      A
default of payment of which he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for
a period of two years. Said accused- respondent Pumendu Kumar Patra
shall surrender forthwith before the trial court. The Registrar of the
High Court of Calcutta shall ensure compliance of this order. The appeal
as against accused-respondent Rabin Jana is dismissed and to that extent
                                                                             B
impugned judgment passed by the High Court stands affirmed.
       N. V. RAMANA, J. 1. I have had the privilege of reading the
draft judgment of my learned brother, who has dealt with all the aspects
of this case in a meticulous manner. Though I agree with the findings
and conclusions arrived at, by my brother, in light of the emergent facts,
it would be appropriate to pen down my separate concurring opinion in
                                                                             c
this case.
        2. A word on criminal justice system before we deal with other
aspects of this case. Criminal justice system is not only about
infrastructure or surveillance, rather it is how we protect our country-men,
it is how we recuperate after loss, it is how we show faith in our consti- D
tution and how we uphold the values of justice, fairness and equality.
There is no dispute that our criminal justice system is a complex one,
administered at various levels of government and fashioned by a range
of actors. When such complicated system is in place, there is a
requirement for higher discipline at every level. I am of the opinion that E
traditional roles played by the stake-holders in criminal justice system
would revolutionize, if there is an increased awareness of the victim
rights. Emphasis on the victim rights would bring about public trust in our
criminal justice system.
       3. A brief reference to the facts, as put forth by the prosecution,   F
would be necessary to dispose of this case. The accused (Pumendu
Kumar Patra) is alleged to have raped the deceased (Saraswati Guchhait)
on 28.04.1997. It is to be noted that the prosecution of the rape case
was pending at the time of the incident (On 27.10.1998), when the
accused have thrown acid at the deceased which caused severe bum
injuries to the body of the deceased. Thereafter she was shifted to a        G
local hospital on the very same day. Although she had narrated the
incident to the doctor i.e. PW6, there was no written complaint filed
with the police. Moreover the deceased alleged that she was threatened
by some miscreants on 29.10.1998 in the hospital. On 23.11.1998, she
passed away due to shock and sepsis caused by the acid attack. These
                                                                             H
22             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                              (2017] 13 S.C.R.



A    facts lament a story ofa helpless woman who was raped and subsequently
     punished for rai.Sing her voice which ultin:iat~ly led tQ h~!' d.e~~z. The
     trial court after a full fledged trial had convicted the accused/respondent
     (Purnendu Kumar Patra) under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
     [hereinafter 'IJIC' for brevity] and sentenced him with death penalty
     whereas the co,accused (Rabin Jana) was sentenced to suffer rigorous
B
     imprisonment fur life under Section 302 of !PC and imposed fine of
     Rs 25,000/-, in default thereof, to undergo further imprisonment for a
     period of five years.
            4. Being dissatisfied, the accused approached the High Court on
     appeal in Death Ref. No. 4 of 2005 and CRA No. 599 of 2005. The
c    High Court while allowing appeal and dismissing the death reference,
     acquitted the accused on hyper technical grounds of delay and !aches in
     the investigation and prosecution. Aggrieved by the acquittal, complainant
     as well as the State has filed these appeals. As we decide these instant
     criminal appeals, our duty is to apply and uphold the rule of law. As
D    judges we are trained to do so. We are required to adjudicate on the
     basis of letter and spirit of law uninfluenced by any external
     circumstances. Having done all that, we feel that the criminal justice
     system has not, served the deceased from being victimized.
            5. At the outset certain aspects on the acid attack needs to be
E    observed. Usually vitriolage or acid attack has transformed itself as a
     gender based violence. Acid attacks not only cause damage to the
     physical appearance of its victims but also cause immense psychological
     trauma thereby becoming a hurdle in their overall development. Although
     we have acknowledged the seriousness of the acid attack when we
     amended our laws in 2013 1, yet the number of acid attacks are on the
F    rise. Moreover this Court has been passing various orders to restrict the
     availability of corrosive substance in the market which is an effort to nip
     this social evil in the bud.' It must be recognized that having stringent
     laws and enforcement agencies may not be sufficient unless deep-rooted
     gender bias is removed from the society.
G          6. Next aspect which needs immediate attention is that the
     deceased was, admitted to the hospital on 27.10.1998 and she died on
     23.11.1998. For 26 days she was struggling between life and death in
     the hospital. Interestingly, there was no dying declaration recorded. It is
     -~~~~~~~~-

     'The Criminal Law(Amendment)Act, 2013, No. XIII of2013.
H    2 Parivartan Kendra v. Union oflndia and Ors., (2016) 3 SCC 571.
 SURESH CHANDRA JANA v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL                               23
             & ORS. [ N.V. RAMANA, J.]

specifically admitted by the treating doctor that the LO. had requested        A
for recording a dying declaration on 07 .11.1998, which was not allowed
by him as he thought that she was responding well to the treatment but
at the same time he admits that the general condition of the patient was
very poor. Further he admits that she was not examined before
tendering such opinion and proper case history was also not maintained.
                                                                               B
Therefore the conduct of the doctor (PW 6) needs to be evaluated in
light of his utter disregard for professionalism. In criminal cases, doctors
inevitably play a very important role, they have a bounden duty to maintain
professionalism in assessing situation and arranging for a dying declaration
to be recorded. Moreover he should have strictly maintained the case
record which is very crucial for successful prosecution. Such good             c
practice, of maintenance of record, is made part of the Indian Medical
Council (Professional conduct, etiquette and ethics) Regulations, 2002.
        7. It would not be out of place to discuss the importance of dying
declaration under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act. The principle
underlying Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act is 'Nemo moriturus D
praesumitur mentire' i.e., man will not meet his maker with a lie in his
mouth. Dying declaration is one of the exceptions to the rule of hearsay.
It is well settl~d that there is no 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 [refer Paniben (Smt.) v. State of Gujarat, (1992) 2 SCC E
474; Munnu Raja and Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (1976) 3
SCC 104; State of U.P. v. Ram Sagar Yadav and Ors., (1985) 1 SCC
552; Ramawati Devi v. State of Bihar, (1983) 1 SCC 211]. Moreover,
if the person making the dying declaration survives, then such ;'tatement
would not be admissible under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, F
rather such Statements may be admissible under Section 157 of the
Indian Evidence Act [refer Gajula Surya Prakasrao v. State ofAndhra
Pradesh. (2010) 1 SCC 88]
       8. In light of the importance the dying declaration holds in a
criminal trial, the dereliction of duty in recording the dying declaration     G
and the doctor's ignorance of medico-legal jurisprudence is apparent
from the material placed before us. My attention has been drawn to
various judgments, which have addressed the aspects of dereliction of
duty by the doctors and importance of medico-legal aspect in medical
jurisprudence [refer State of Gujarat v. Hasmukh @ Bhikha Gova
                                                                               H
24                SUPREME COURT REPORTS                       [2017] 13 S.C.R.


A    Harijan, (1996) 1 GLR 292, Muniammal v. The Superintendent of
     Police, Kaneheepuram District, Kancheepuram, Criminal Original
     Petition No. 12582 of2007 (The High Court of judicature Madras) and
     Dr. lndrajit Khandekar v. Union of India and Ors., W.P. No. 4974
     of2012 (High Court ofjudicature at Bombay: Nagpur bench)]. It has to
     be remembered that every stakeholder in this criminal justice system is
B
     expected to <ict with a sense of fairness to bring out the truth so that
     punishment can be meted to those who deserve. Although courts are
     provided with the duty to dispense justice, it cannot be denied that
     effective dispensation of justice by the courts in this country requires
     support of all the stakeholders. In light of the above, every stakeholder is
c    expected to be aware of their responsibility and work towards achieving
     ends of the criminal justice system.
           9. The last aspect is regarding the defective investigation and
     prosecution. If a negligent investigation or omissions or lapses, due to
     perfunctory investigation, are not effectively rectified, the faith and
D    confidence of the people in the law enforcing agency would be shaken.
     Therefore the police have to demonstrate utmost diligence, seriousness
     and promptness. [refer Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar & Ors.,
     (1998) 4 SC(::: 517].
            10. The basic requirement that a trial must be fair is crucial for
E    any civilized criminal justice system. It is essential in a society which
     recognizes fiuman rights and is based on values such as freedoms, the
     rule of law, democracy and openness. The whole purpose of the trial is
     to convict th~ guilty and at the same time to protect the innocent. In this
     process courts should always be in search of the truth and should come
     to the concl11sion, based on the facts and circumstances of each case,
F    without defeating the very purpose ofjustice.


     Ankil Gyan                                                Appeals disposed of.