Dying Declaration Cannot Be Discarded Merely Because Relatives Of Deceased Were Present In Hospital While Recording It: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that a dying declaration cannot be disbelieved merely because parents and relatives of the deceased were present in the hospital while recording it.

"It is quite natural that when such an incident happens, the parents and other relatives try to reach the hospital immediately. Merely because they were in the hospital, the same is no ground to disbelieve the dying declaration, recorded by the Magistrate", the bench said while dismissing the appeal filed by a murder accused.

In the declaration, recorded by the Judicial Magistrate,  the deceased stated that the accused has poured kerosene oil and set her ablaze. Challenging the concurrent conviction, the accused before the apex court contended that the dying declaration was tutored one and the same was made at the instance of family members of the deceased, who were there with the deceased in hospital at the relevant time. According to his version, the deceased made attempt to commit suicide, and he tried his best to extinguish the fire.

Examining the case records, the bench noted that the Magistrate, in her deposition, has clearly stated that the relatives of deceased, Pooja Rani, were not there at the time of recording dying declaration of the deceased.

"Further, merely because the parents and other relatives of the deceased were present in the Hospital, when the statement of the deceased was recorded, it cannot be said that the said statement was a tutored one. It is quite natural that when such an incident happens, the parents and other relatives try to reach the hospital immediately. Merely because they were in the hospital, the same is no ground to disbelieve the dying declaration, recorded by the Magistrate, who was examined as PW-16.", the court said while dismissing this contention. 

To dismiss the appeal, the court noted that, if the dying declaration is considered along with the depositions of other witnesses, it clearly establishes the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Case: Satpal vs State of Haryana  [CRA 261 OF 2021]

Coram: Justices Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy

Counsel: Adv Nanita Sharma, Dy. A.G. Deepak Thukral

Citation: LL 2021 SC

Click here to Read/Download Judgment

Read Judgment