Can Rely Upon A Dying Declaration Recorded By Executive Magistrate After Doctor Finds Patient To Be Mentally Fit: Chhattisgarh HC

A bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal observed thus while upholding the conviction of two accused, one of whom had been convicted of murder charges and sentenced to life imprisonment.

The Court, while upholding the judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court, noted that the trial court was correct in convicting appellant no. 1, Ajay Verma (author of the crime), and appellant no. 2, Amanchand Routiy (who helped Ajay in destroying evidence).

The conviction was based on the dying declaration made by the deceased, Geeta Yadav, before an Executive Magistrate after a doctor certified that she was capable of giving a statement.

The facts in brief

A complaint was lodged by one Meghnath Yadav (PW-1) at the Police Station alleging that his elder brother's daughter, Kumari Ganga Yadav (the deceased), had been burned by Ajay Verma (accused no. 1), with whom she had a love affair.

It was also alleged that while being taken to the hospital, she told her family members that on August 16-17, 2020, Verma had called her to meet him. When she went to the designated place, they had an argument, and Verma poured kerosene on her, set her on fire, and ran away.

It was stated that after being burned, she came running home, shouting, "Save me, save me," and tried to extinguish the fire in the mud outside the field while informing her family about the incident. Following this, an FIR was lodged against Verma under Section 307 of the IPC on August 18, 2020.

On the same day, the Executive Magistrate recorded the dying declaration of the deceased after a doctor certified that she was in a fit mental state to make a statement. The victim later died, and the case was subsequently investigated as a murder. A charge sheet was filed under sections 302/34 and 201/34 of the IPC.

Regarding the role of accused no. 2, Amanchand Routiya, it was alleged that he had helped the accused by cleaning the crime scene to hide evidence.

The trial Court, upon appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, and relying upon the dying declaration, found the appellants guilty of the aforementioned offences and convicted and sentenced them accordingly.

Challenging their conviction, the accused moved to the High Court wherein their counsel inter alia argued that the prosecution could not prove that on the date of recording the dying declaration, the deceased was in fit mental condition.

It was further submitted that the prosecution had not asked any question to the doctor to prove that on the date of recording the dying declaration, the deceased was in fit mental condition.

Therefore, it was strongly contended that the dying declaration was highly doubtful and liable to be discarded.

On the other hand, defending the Trial Court's judgment, the Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the state government, opposed the submissions and argued that the dying declaration was true and voluntary.

It was submitted that the dying declaration was recorded in the presence of the Executive Magistrate and prescribed by a police officer. At the beginning and end of the declaration, it was certified that the deceased was fit to give a statement, corroborated by her thumb impression on the document.

It was also pointed out that neither the prosecution nor the defence questioned the Doctor about the deceased's condition during her examination, implying there was no dispute about her fitness to provide the statement.

High Court's observations

Considering the arguments of both parties, the Division bench, finding substance in the contention of the state counsel, observed that nothing had been extracted from the statements of the Doctor and Executive Magistrate to hold that the deceased was not in a fit physical and mental state of mind to give dying declaration and she (deceased) had not given any dying declaration.

The Court further noted that the statement given by the Executive Magistrate cannot be disbelieved as he is a Government Officer and has no vested interest in either of the parties.

As such, the Court found sufficient evidence on record to believe that the dying declaration had been given by the deceased and that her declaration was true and voluntary.

Consequently, the Court upheld the Trial court's order and dismissed the appeals filed by the accused-appellants.

Case title - Ajay Verma vs. State of Chhattisgarh along with a connected appeal

Case citation:

Click Here To Read/DownloadOrder