Dying Declarations Recorded By Magistrate Or Higher Authority Prevail When Inconsistent Dying Declarations Are Recorded: Rajasthan HC
The Rajasthan High Court observed that when multiple and inconsistent dying declarations are recorded, the one recorded by a Magistrate or higher officer can be relied upon if it is found to be truthful and free of suspicion.
The Court was hearing a Criminal Appeal under Section 374 CrPC seeking to set aside the conviction and sentences under Sections 302/34 and 447 of IPC and to acquit the Appellants.
The bench of Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Munnuri Laxman observed, “when multiple dying declarations were recorded, and inconsistencies/contradictions were found therein, then the statement that has been recorded by a Magistrate or like higher officer can be relied on, subject to the indispensable qualities of truthfulness and being free of suspicion.”
Advocate Udit Mathur appeared for the Appellant and PP B.R. Bishnoi appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
In the present case, the deceased was assaulted on his farm by accused persons, leading to serious injuries. His wife witnessed the attack, and his son and brother took him to the hospital. The deceased gave a dying declaration implicating the assailants, and an FIR was registered. He later mentioned others in another dying declaration but they were not prosecuted. The trial Court charged the accused persons under Sections 364, 302/34, and 447 IPC after relying on the first dying declaration that was given to the Police. They were convicted and sentenced under Sections 302/34 and 447 IPC.
The Court relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Anmol Singh Vs State of M.P (2008) 5 SCC 468 where multiple dying declaration were recorded and quoted, “if some inconsistencies are noticed between one dying declaration and the other, the court has to examine the nature of the inconsistencies, namely, whether they are material or not [and] while scrutinising the contents of various dying declarations, in such a situation, the court has to examine the same in the light of the various surrounding facts and circumstances.”
The Court further mentioned the decision of the Supreme Court in Lakhan Singh Vs State of M.P. (2010) 8 SCC 514 and quoted, “In case there are multiple dying declarations and there are inconsistencies between them, generally, the dying declaration recorded by the higher officer like a Magistrate can be relied upon, provided that there is no circumstance giving rise to any suspicion about its truthfulness.”
The Court further observed that after inconsistencies/contradictions were recorded in a case then the other corroborative evidence is required. However, according to the Court, in the present case, there is no strong corroborative evidence to support the claim of the prosecution that the dying declaration recorded by the police is reliable, and not the one as recorded by the Magistrate.
The Court said that there is reliable and cogent evidence on record that the accused-appellant’s conviction deserves to be reversed, from conviction to acquittal.
Accordingly, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned judgment.
Finally, the Court allowed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Jeet Singh v. State (Neutral Citation: 2024:RJ-JD:29210-DB)
