25 September 1957
Supreme Court
Download

KUSHAL RAO Vs THE STATE OF BOMBAY

Case number: Appeal (crl.) 184 of 1956


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 12  

PETITIONER: KUSHAL RAO

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF BOMBAY

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 25/09/1957

BENCH: SINHA, BHUVNESHWAR P. BENCH: SINHA, BHUVNESHWAR P. MENON, P. GOVINDA KAPUR, J.L.

CITATION:  1958 AIR   22            1958 SCR  552

ACT:        Supreme Court, Criminal Appellate jurisdiction   of--Certif-        icate  of  fitness,  if can be granted by High  Court  on  a        question  of fact Dying declaration evidiantry  value  of-If        must be corroborated in order to sustain  conviction-Consti-        tution of India, Art. 134(1)(c)- Indian Evidence Act (.1  of        1872), s. 32(1).

HEADNOTE:        The Supreme Court does not ordinarily function as a Court of        criminal  appeal, and it is not competent for a  High  Court        under Art. 134(1)(c) of the Constitution to grant a certifi-        cate  of fitness for appeal to this Court on a ground  which        is essentially one of fact.        Haripada  Dey v. The -State of West Bengal" - (1956)  S.C.R.        639, followed.         There  is no absolute rule of law, not even a rule of  pru-        dence  that has- ripened -into a: rule of law- that a  dying        declaration in order-that it may sustain an order of convic-        tion  must be corroborated by, other  independent  evidence.        The observations made        553        by this Court in Madhoprasad v. The State of Madhya  Pradesh        are  in the nature of obiter dicta and do not lay  down  the        law.        Madhoprasad  v. The State of Madhya Pradesh,  A.I.R.  (1953)        S.C. 420, considered.        In re Guruswami Tevar, I.L.R. (1940) Mad.  I58, approved.        Case-law reviewed.        The provision of s. 32(I) of the Indian Evidence Act " which        makes  the statement in a dying declaration as to the  cause        of  death and the circumstances that brought it about  rele-        vant,  is an exception to the general rule of  exclusion  of        hearsay evidence and evidence untested by cross-examination.        The special sanctity which the Legislature attaches to  such        a declaration must be respected unless such declaration  can        be shown not to have been made in expectation of death or to        be  otherwise unreliable and any evidence adduced  for  this        purpose  can only detract from its value but not affect  its        admissibility.        Although a dying declaration has to be very closely  scruti-

2

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 12  

      nised,  and tested as any other piece of evidence, once  the        Court comes to the conclusion, in any particular case,  that        it is true, no question of corroboration arises.        A dying declaration cannot be placed in the same category as        the evidence of an accomplice or a confession.        Consequently,  in a case where the trial judge as  also  the        High Court founded their orders of conviction of an  accused        person under S. 302 Of the Indian Penal Code mainly on three        dying  declarations  made by the murdered  person  in  quick        succession one after the other, and the High Court,  relying        on  a  decision of this Court, sought for  corroboration  of        such dying declarations in the fact that the accused  person        had absconded and was arrested in suspicious  circumstances,        but  was in doubt as to the sufficiency of such evidence  of        corroboration  and granted the certificate of fitness  under        Art.  I34(I)(c):        Held,  that  the certificate granted by the High  Court  was        incompetent  and as the case disclosed no grounds  on  which        this  Court  could possibly grant special  leave  to  appeal        under  Art.  136  of the Constitution, the  appeal  must  be        dismissed.

JUDGMENT:        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: criminal Appeal No. 184  of        1956.        Appeal.. from the judgment and order dated October 15, 1956,        of  the former Nagpur High Court in Criminal Appeal No.  205        of  1956 and Criminal Reference No. 15 of 1956, arising  out        of the judgment and order dated July 10, 1956, of the  First        Additional  District Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No.  34        of 1956.        554        J. N. Banerjee and P. C. Agarwala, for the appellant.        Jindra Lal and R.H.Dhebdr, for the respondent.        1957.   September 25.  The following Judgment of  the  Court        was delivered by        SINHA J.-This appeal on a certificate of fitness under  Art.        134(1)(c),  granted by the High Court at Nagpur (as it  then        was), is directed against the concurrent judgment and orders        of  the  courts below, so far as the  appellant  Khushal  is        concerned,  convicting and sentencing him to death under  s.        302,  Indian  Penal Code, for the  pre-meditated  murder  of        Baboolal  on the night of February 12, 1956, in one  of  the        quarters of the city of Nagpur.        It  appears  that there are two rival factions in  what  has        been  called  the Mill area in Nagpur.   The  appellant  and        Tukaram  who has been acquitted by the High Court,  are  the        leaders of one of the factions, and Ramgopal, P.W. 4, Inaya-        tullah, P.W. 1, and Tantu, P.W. 5, are said to be the  lead-        ers  of the opposite faction.  Before the time and  date  of        the occurrence, there had been a number of incidents between        the two rival factions in respect of some of which Inayatul-        lah  and Tantu aforesaid had been prosecuted.  Even  on  the        date  of the occurrence, apart from the one leading  to  the        murder  of  Baboolal,  which is the  subject-matter  of  the        present appeal, Tantu and Inayatullah had made two  separate        reports about the attacks on them by Khushal’s party.  There        was another report lodged by Sampat-one of the four  persons        placed on trial along with the appellant, for the murder  of        Baboolal.   That  report  was lodged  at  Ganeshpeth  police        station  at  about 9.30 p.m. on the same  date-February  12,        1956-against  Inayatullah alias Kalia and Tantu,  that  they        had  attacked the former with sharp-edged weapons  (Ex.   P-

3

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 12  

      26).  The prosecution case is that the appellant Khushal was        on  bad terms with Baboolal who was on very  friendly  terms        with  the leaders of the opposite faction aforesaid.   Being        infuriated  by the conduct of Baboolal in  associating  with        the  enemies of the party of the accused,  Sampat,  Mahadeo,        Khushal and Tukaram        555        suddenly  attacked Baboolal with swords and spears  and  in-        flicted injuries on different parts of his body.  The occur-        rence took place in a narrow lane of Nagpur at about 9  p.m.        Baboolal  was taken by his father and other persons  to  the        Mayo hospital where he reached at about 925 p.m. The  doctor        in attendance Dr. Kanikdale (P.W. 14) at once questioned him        about  the  incident  and Baboolat is said to  have  made  a        statement  to the doctor which the latter noted in the  bed-        head  ticket (Ex.  P-17) that he had been assaulted by  Khu-        shal  and Tukaram with swords and spears.  After noting  the        statement  aforesaid, of Baboolal, the doctor telephoned  to        the  Ganeshpeth  police station where  the  information  was        noted at 9.45 p.m. On receiving the information, Sub-Inspec-        tor A. K. Khan recorded ’Ex.  P-1) and registered an offence        under s. 307, Indian Penal Code, and immediately went to the        Mayo  hospital along with a head-constable and several  con-        stables.   He  found  Baboolal in a  serious  condition  and        suspecting  that he might not survive and apprebending  that        it might take time for the magistrate to be informed and  to        be at the spot, to record the dying declaration, he consult-        ed Dr. Ingle, the attending doctor, whether Baboolal was  in        a fit condition to make a statement.  The doctor advised him        to have the dying declaration recorded by a magistrate.  The        Sub-Inspector  decided that it would be more  advisable  for        him  to  record  the dying declaration  without  any  delay.        Hence,  he actually recorded Baboolal’s statement in  answer        to the questions put by him (Ex.  P-2) at 10-15 p.m. In  the        meantime, Shri M. S. Khetkar, a magistrate, first class, was        called in, and he recorded the dying declaration (Ex.  P-16)        between  11-15 and 11-35 p.m. in the presence of  Dr.  Ingle        who  certified that he had examined Baboolal and  had  found        him  mentally in a fit condition to make his dying  declara-        tion.   Besides these three dying declarations  recorded  in        quick succession, as aforesaid, by responsible public  serv-        ants,  Baboolal  is said to have made oral statements  to  a        number  of  persons, which it is not necessary  to  set  out        because  the High Court has not acted upon those oral  dying        declarations.  We        71        556        shall have to advert, later, to the recorded dying  declara-        tions in some detail, in the course of this judgment.  It is        enough  to  say  at this stage that the  courts  below  have        founded  their orders of conviction of the appellant  mainly        on those dying declarations.  Baboolal died the next morning        at about 10 a.m. in hospital.        Having come to know the names of two of the alleged  assail-        ants  of Baboolal from his recorded dying declarations,  the        police  became busy apprehending those persons.  They  could        not be found at their respective houses.  The appellant  was        arrested  four days later in an out-house locked  from  out-        side,  of a bungalow on Seminary Hill in Nagpur.  The  other        person named as one of the assailants, Tukaram, was arrested        much later.  The prosecution case is that these persons were        absconding and keeping out of the way of the police.        After investigation and the necessary inquiry, four  persons        were placed on trial and the appellant was one of them.  The        Additional Sessions Judge acquitted two of them and convict-

4

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 12  

      ed the remaining two the appellant and Tukaram-under s. 302.        Indian  Penal  Code, or in the alternative, tinder  s.  302,        read with s. 34, Indian Penal Code.  He sentenced the appel-        lant  to  death  because  in  his  opinion,  he  had  caused        Baboolal’s death intentionally, and there were no  extenuat-        ing circumstances.  He sentenced Tukaram to imprisonment for        life,  because  in  the learned Judge’s view  of  the  case,        Tukaram  had acted under the instigation of  the  appellant.        Accordingly,  the learned Additional Sessions Judge  made  a        reference to the High Court for confirmation of the sentence        of  death.  That reference was heard along with  the  appeal        filed by the condemned prisoner.  The reference, the  appeal        by the convicted accused persons, as also the appeal by  the        Government  of Madhya Pradesh, against the two accused  per-        sons who had been acquitted by the learned trial Judge,  and        the  revisional  application  for  enhancement  of  sentence        passed  upon  Tukaram, also filed by the  State  Government,        were all heard together and disposed of by one judgment,                                    557        by a Bench consisting of Hidayatullah C. J. and  Mangalmurti        J.  The High Court, apparently with a view to  understanding        the  evidence adduced in the case on behalf of the  parties,        made a local inspection on September 17, 1956, and  recorded        their  impressions in a note which forms part of the  record        of the High Court.  In a very well-considered judgment,  the        High  Court,  by its judgment and orders dated  October  13,        1956, acquitted Tukaram, giving him the benefit of the doubt        caused  chiefly  by the fact that in the  dying  declaration        (Ex.  P-16) recorded by the magistrate as aforesaid, he  has        been  described as a Teli, whereas Tukaram before the  Court        is  a Kolhi, as stated in the charge-sheet.  The  doubt  was        further  accentuated  by the fact that there were  three  or        four persons of the name of Tukaram, residing in the  neigh-        bourhood  and some of them are Telis.  The High Court  exam-        ined,  in meticulous details, the evidence of  the  eye-wit-        nesses Inayatullah, P.W. 1, and Sadashiv, P.W. 3, and agreed        with the trial Judge in his estimate of their testimony that        those witnesses being partisan, their evidence could not  be        relied  upon,  to base a conviction.  The  High  Court  went        further  and  came to the. conclusion  that  their  evidence        being  suspect, could not be used even as corroboration,  if        corroboration  was  needed of the three  dying  declarations        made by Baboolal, as aforesaid.  They upheld the  conviction        and  sentence of the appellant on the ground that the  dying        declarations  were corroborated by the fact that the  appel-        lant  had been absconding and keeping out of the way of  the        police, and had been arrested under very suspicious  circum-        stances.  These circumstances and the alleged absconding  by        Tukaram  were not so suspicious. as to afford  corroboration        against him.  In that view, the High Court " very reluctant-        ly  " gave the benefit of the doubt to Tukaram  and  allowed        his appeal.  The High Court also agreed with the trial Judge        in acquitting the other two accused persons Sampat and Maha-        deo-because  these  two persons had not been  named  in  the        dying declarations, and the oral testimony was not of such a        character  as to justify conviction.  Accordingly, the  Gov-        ernment appeal and        558        application  in  revision were dismissed.   As  against  the        appellant, the reference made by the learned trial judge was        accepted  and his appeal dismissed.  Thus, under the  orders        of the High Court, only the appellant stood convicted on the        charge  of murder with a sentence of death against him.   He        moved the High Court for a certificate under art.  134(1)(c)        of the Constitution, and the High Court granted a " certifi-

5

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 12  

      cate of fitness ". Hence, this appeal.        At  the outset, we must repeat what this Court has  observed        in  a number of appeals coming up to this Court on  certifi-        cates of fitness granted by High Courts, mainly on questions        of  fact.  The main ground for the grant of the  certificate        may be reproduced in the words of the High Court itself:        "The  main  ground  is that there  is  not  enough  evidence        against the accused and that there is an error in our  judg-        ment  in  holding that there was no evidence  to  show  that        Khushal  whose absconding has been held to  corroborate  the        dying  declaration, was involved in a liquor  case.   During        the  course of the argument neither side drew our  attention        to the documents which were in the record; nor was any point        made  of it, though we questioned why the absconding  should        not  be taken into consideration.  Now it seems  that  there        are  one or two defence exhibits in which it has been  shown        that  Khushal was not found in his house when he was  wanted        in  a liquor case after a search on 5th February, 1956.   In        view of the fact that there is this error and the sufficien-        cy  of the evidence might be a matter for  consideration  in        the  light of this additional evidence, we think this  is  a        fit  case for a special certificate under art. 134(1)(c)  of        the Constitution."        It  is clear that the High Court granted the certificate  of        fitness under Art. 134(1)(c) of the Constitution not on  any        difficult  question  of law or procedure  which  it  thought        required  to  be settled by this Court, but  on  a  question        which is essentially one of fact, namely, whether there  was        sufficient evidence of the guilt of the accused.  The latest        reported case of this Court, bearing on this aspect of  this        appeal, is Haripada                                    559        Dey  v.  The State of West Bengal(1), to the effect  that  a        High  Court exceeds its power of granting a  certificate  of        fitness under that article if the certificate discloses that        the main ground on which it was based related to a  question        of fact, and that the High Court is not justified in sending        up such a case for further consideration by this Court which        does  not,  ordinarily, concern itself  with  deciding  mere        questions of fact unless such questions arise on a  certifi-        cate  granted under cls. (a) or (b) of Art. 134 (1)  of  the        Constitution.  In other words, this Court does not function’        ordinarily,  as a Court of Criminal Appeal.  Under the  Con-        stitution,  it  has the power, and it is its duty,  to  hear        appeals, as a Regular Court of Appeal, on facts involved  in        cases  coming up to this Court on a certificate  under  Art.        134(1)(a)  or (b).  To the same effect are the  other  deci-        sions  of this Court, referred to in the  reported  decision        aforesaid, for example,                   Narsingh      v. The State of Uttar Pradesh (2)                   Baladin       v. The State of Uttar Pradesh(3)                   sunder Singh  v.  State of Uttar Pradesh(4)        It  is,  therefore,  incumbent upon the High  Courts  to  be        vigilant in cases coming up before them, by way of an appli-        cation for a certificate of fitness under Art. 134(1) (c) of        the Constitution.        In view of these considerations, it has got to be held -that        the  certificate of fitness granted by the High  Court  does        not  satisfy the requirements of Art. 134(1)(c) of the  Con-        stitution.  The appeal on such a certificate has, therefore,        to be dismissed in limine; but we have to satisfy  ourselves        whether  there are such grounds as would justify this  Court        in  granting special leave to appeal to this Court,  if  the        appellant  had  approached this Court in  that  behalf.   We        have, therefore, examined the record of this case from  that

6

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 12  

      point of view.  It appears from the judgments of the  courts        below that the prosecution case rests mainly upon the  three        dying declarations of Baboolal who died shortly after making        those  statements as to his assailants, in quick  succession        within about two and a half hours of the        (1)  [I956] S.C.R. 639.        (2)  [1955] i S.C.R. 238.        (3)  A.I.R. 1956 S.C. 181.        (4)  A.I.R. 1956 S.C.411.        560        occurrence-indeed,  the  first one to the doctor,  was  made        within  half an hour; as also upon the evidence of two  per-        sons Inayatullah, P.W. I and Sadashiv, P.W. 3, who figure as        eye-witnesses, and Trimbak, P.W. 2 and Ramgopal, P.W. 4, who        claimed  to have turned up in the nick of time,  to  witness        the  last stages of the occurrence.  Though the trial  Judge        did  not  disbelieve  the oral testimony  of  the  witnesses        aforesaid,  and only insisted upon corroboration,  the  High        Court was more pronounced in its view that the testimony  of        those  four witnesses was not trustworthy.  The  High  Court        has  discussed their evidence in great detail, and  was  not        prepared to accept any part of their testimony on the ground        that they were strongly partisan witnesses and that they did        not  come to the rescue of the victim of the  murderous  as-        sault if they were really in the neighbourhood of the  place        of the occurrence, as claimed by them.  If we had to  assess        the  value  of that body of oral evidence, we may  not  have        come  to the same conclusion, but we proceed on the  assump-        tion  that  the High Court is right in its estimate  of  the        oral testimony adduced on behalf of the prosecution.   After        discussing  all that evidence, the High Court took the  view        that  it could not place any reliance on the oral  testimony        of  what  Baboolal had spoken to P.Ws. 2 and  19  when  they        deposed  that  Baboolal  had named two  of  his  assailants,        namely,  the appellant and Tukaram.  The High  Court  reiied        upon the three dying declarations recorded at the  hospital-        first, by the attending doctor, second, by the Sub-Inspector        of  police  and the third, by the magistrate,  first  class,        between 9-25 and 11-35 p. m. As regards authenticity of  the        record  of those three statements of the deceased, the  High        Court had no doubt, nor has any doubt been cast upon them by        counsel  for the appellant.  The High Court then  considered        the question whether the conviction of the accused could  be        based  on  those dying declarations alone.  It  pointed  out        that  in that High Court as also in other High Courts,  con-        victions on dying declarations alone had been rested if  the        Court was satisfied that the dying declaration was true and,        therefore, could be acted upon.  But the decision of        561        this  Court in Ram Nath Madhoprasad v. State of Madhya  Pra-        desh  (1) was brought to their notice, and in view  of  that        decision,  the  High Court looked for corroboration  of  the        dying  declarations aforesaid.  It found that  corroboration        in  the  subsequent  conduct of the appellant  in  that,  as        deposed  to by prosecution witness 31-the Sub-Inspector  in-        charge of Ganeshpetli police station-the appellant could not        be  traced till February 16, 1956, on which day, the  police        obtained information to the effect that the accused had been        concealing himself in the premises of Ganesh dhobi at Hazari        Pahar.   He went there and found the appellant sitting in  a        room which had been locked from the front side.  He arrested        the  accused.   The High Court did not believe  the  defence        suggestion  that the appellant bad been  concealing  himself        for fear of the police in connection with an excise case  in        which be had been suspected.  The records in connection with

7

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 12  

      that  case have been placed before us, and, after  examining        those records, we do not find any good reasons for differing        from the High Court in its appreciation of the circumstances        connected  with  the absconding of the  accused.   The  High        Court took the view that the circumstance of the appellant’s        conduct  in concealing himself and evading the police for  a        number of days was consistent with the prosecution case that        he  was concerned in the crime which was the  subject-matter        of the charge against him.  Thus, in effect, the High  Court        found  corroboration which, according to the ruling of  this        Court referred to above, was necessary in order to base  the        conviction upon the dying declarations of Baboolal.        The  question whether the circumstances of  the  appellant’s        alleged  keeping out of the way of the police, for a  number        of  days after the occurrence, can be used as  corroboration        of the dying declarations, is not free from doubt and diffi-        culty.   The argument on behalf of the accused that  he  had        been  keeping  out of the way of the police because  he  was        suspected in the excise case is not entirely unfounded.   He        had  not left the city of Nagpur and gone out of the  juris-        diction of the local police.  In those circumstances we  are        not        (1)  A.I.R. 1953 S.C. 420.        562        prepared  to say that the alleged absconding of the  accused        could  afford sufficient corroboration, if corroboration  of        the dying declarations was needed.        In this Court, a good deal of argument was addressed to  us,        to  the  effect that the ruling of this Court  lays  down  a        sound proposition of law which should have been followed  by        the  High  Court, and that the alleged fact of  the  accused        absconding  and keeping out of the way of the  police  could        not be used as corroboration of the dying declaration.   The        decision  of this Court in Ram Nath Madhoprasad v. State  of        Madhya Pradesh (1), contains the following observations,  at        p. 423, which have been very strongly relied upon, on behalf        of  the appellant, as having a great bearing upon the  value        to be placed upon the dying declarations:        "It is settled law that it is not safe to convict an accused        person merely on the evidence furnished by a dying  declara-        tion without further corroboration because such a  statement        is not made on oath and is not subject to  cross-examination        and because the maker of it might be mentally and physically        in  a state of confusion and might well be drawing upon  his        imagination  while he was making the declaration.  It is  in        this light that the different dying declarations made by the        deceased  and  sought to be proved in the case  have  to  be        considered.........        We have, therefore, to examine the legal position whether it        is settled law that a dying declaration by itself can, in no        circumstances,  be the basis of a conviction.  In the  first        place,  we  have to examine the decision aforesaid  of  this        Court  from  this point of view.  This  Court  examined  the        evidence in detail with a view to satisfying itself that the        dying  declarations relied upon in that case were true.   In        that case, apart from the dying declarations, there was  the        evidence  of the approver.  This Court found that  the  evi-        dence  of  the approver and other oral  testimony  had  been        rightly rejected by the High Court.  In that case also,  the        Court  had  mainly relied upon the  dying  declarations  for        basing the conviction under s. 302,        (i)  A.I.R. 1953 S.C. 420.        563        read with s. 34, Indian Penal Code.  This Court examined for        itself, the dying declarations and the other evidence  bear-

8

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 12  

      ing  upon  the truth and reliability of the  dying  declara-        tions,  and after an elaborate discussion of all  that  evi-        dence,  came to the conclusion that the  dying  declarations        did  not contain "a truthful version of what  actually  hap-        pened".  Thus after a very careful and cautious  examination        of  the facts of the case, connected with the  recording  of        the dying declaration, and of the other evidence in the case        and of the fact that it was a dark night without any  lights        available at the place of occurrence, this Court  distinctly        came  to the conclusion that the dying declaration  was  not        true and could not be relied upon to base, upon that  alone,        the  conviction of the appellants.  It is, thus’ clear  that        the  observations  quoted above, of this Court, are  in  the        nature  of obiter dicta.  But as it was insisted that  those        observations were binding upon the courts in India and  upon        us,  we have to examine them with the care and caution  they        rightly deserve.        The Legislature in its wisdom has enacted in s. 32(1) of the        Evidence Act that "When the statement is made by a person as        to the cause of his death, or as to any of the circumstances        of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases  in        which the cause of that person’s death comes into question",        such  a statement written or verbal made by a person who  is        dead  (omitting the unnecessary words) is itself a  relevant        fact.   This  provision has been made  by  the  Legislature,        advisedly,  as  a matter of sheer necessity -by  way  of  an        exception  to the general rule that hearsay is  no  evidence        and that evidence, which has not been tested by cross-exami-        nation, is not admissible.  The purpose of cross-examination        is to test the veracity of the statements made by a witness.        In the view of the Legislature, that test is supplied by the        solemn occasion when it was made, namely, at a time when the        person  making  the statement was in danger  of  losing  his        life.   At such a serious and solemn moment, that person  is        not expected to tell lies; and secondly, the test of  cross-        examination  would  not be available.  In such a  case,  the        necessity of oath also has been        72        564        dispensed with for the same reasons.  Thus, a statement made        by a dying person as to the cause of death has been accorded        by the Legislature a special sanctity which should, on first        principles,  be  respected unless there  are  clear  circum-        stances brought out in the evidence to show that the  person        making  the statement was not in expectation of  death,  not        that that circumstance would affect the admissibility of the        statement,  but  only its weight.  It may also be  shown  by        evidence that a dying declaration is not reliable because it        was  not made at the earliest opportunity, and, thus,  there        was a reasonable ground to believe its having been put  into        the  mouth  of the dying man, when his power  of  resistance        against telling a falsehood was ebbing away; or because  the        statement  has not been properly recorded, for example,  the        statement bad been recorded as a result of prompting by some        interested parties or was in answer to leading questions put        by  the recording officer, or, by the person  purporting  to        reproduce that statement.  These may be some of the  circum-        stances  which  can be said to detract from the value  of  a        dying declaration.  But in our opinion, there is no absolute        rule  of law, or even a rule of prudence which  has  ripened        into a rule of law, that a dying declaration unless corrobo-        rated by other independent evidence, is Dot fit to be  acted        upon,  and made the basis of a conviction.  No  decision  of        this  Court,  apart from the decision already  noticed,  has        been  pointed out to us as an authority for the  proposition

9

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 12  

      that  a  dying declaration, in order to be acted upon  by  a        court, must be corroborated by independent evidence.  On the        other  hand, the different High Courts in  India  (including        Burma)  have  taken conflicting views as to the value  of  a        dying  declaration in part or in its entirety,  without  any        independent corroboration.  For example, a Division Bench of        the  Bombay High Court, presided over by Sir  John  Beaumont        C.J.,  has  laid  down in the case of  Emperor  v.  Akbarali        Karimbhai (I), that a statement which is covered by s. 32(1)        of  the  Evidence  Act is relevant evidence and  has  to  be        judged on the same principles as other evidence, bearing  in        mind that such a        (i)  I.L.R. (1932) 56 Bom. 31.                                    565        declaration  was  not made on oath and was  not  subject  to        cross-examination,  and  is, therefore, a  weaker  type  ,of        evidence  than that given by a witness on oath.   Therefore,        if  a part of a dying declaration is deliberately false,  it        will not be safe to act upon the other part of the  declara-        tion  without very definite corroboration, That  Bench  also        ruled that it is not correct to postulate that because  some        part  of the dying declaration is false, the whole  declara-        tion  must  necessarily  be disregarded.   The  Bombay  High        Court,  thus,  did not agree with the  observations  of  the        Calcutta  High  Court in the case of Emperor  v.  Premananda        Dutt (1) to the effect that it is not permissible to  accept        a dying declaration in part and to reject the other part and        that a dying declaration stood on a widely different footing        from  the  testimony of a witness given in  court.   On  the        other hand, we have the decision of the Rangoon High  Court,        reported  in the case of the King v. Maung Po Thi  (2).   In        that case, the positive evidence led on behalf of the prose-        cution was found to have been tampered with and  unreliable.        The  Court  set aside the order of acquittal passed  by  the        trial judge, and recorded an order of conviction for murder,        practically  on the dying declaration of the victim  of  the        crime.   The Court observed that there was. no such rule  of        prudence  as had been invoked in aid of the accused  by  the        trial  judge who had observed that an accusation by a  dying        man, without corroboration from an independent source, could        not be the sole basis for conviction.  The learned Judges of        the High Court further observed that in order to found on  a        dying  declaration  alone, a judgment of  conviction  of  an        accused  person, the Court must be fully satisfied that  the        dying  declaration  has the impress of truth  on  it,  after        examining  all the circumstances in which the  dying  person        made  his statement ex-parte and without the accused  having        the  opportunity  of cross-examining him.  If,  on  such  an        examination, the Court was satisfied that the dying declara-        tion  was  the true version of  the  occurrence,  conviction        could be based solely upon it.        (1) (1925) I.L.R. 52 Cal. 987.  (2) A.I.R. 1938 Rang. 282        566        In  the  High  Court of Madras, there was  a  difference  of        judicial opinion, as expressed in certain unreported  cases,        which  resulted in a reference to a Full Bench.  Sir  Lionel        Leach C. J. presiding over the Full Bench (In re,  Guruswami        Tevar  (1) ), delivered the unanimous opinion of  the  Court        after  examining  the decisions of that High  Court  and  of        other  High Courts in India.  His conclusions are  expressed        in the penultimate paragraph of his judgment, thus:-        " In my judgment it is not possible to lay down any hard and        fast  rule  when  a dying declaration  should  be  accepted,        beyond saying that each case must be decided in the light of        the  other facts and the surrounding circumstances,  but  if

10

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 12  

      the  Court, after taking everything into  consideration,  is        convinced  that  the statement is true, it is  its  duty  to        convict,  notwithstanding that there is no corroboration  in        the  true sense.  The Court must, of course, be  fully  con-        vinced  of  the truth of the statement  and,  naturally,  it        could  not be fully convinced if there were anything in  the        other evidence or in the surrounding circumstances to  raise        suspicion as to its credibility."        To the same effect are the decisions of the Patna High Court        in  the case of Mohamad Arif v. Emperor(2), and of the  Nag-        pur.   High  Court in Gulabrao Krishnajee  Maratha  v.  King        Emperor(3).        The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council had to consider,        in  the  case  of  Chandrasekera  alias  Alisandiri  v.  The        King(4), the question whether mere signs made by  the victim        of a murderous attack which had resulted in  the cutting  of        the  throat,  thus, disabling her from speaking  out,  could        come  within  the meaning of s. 32 of  the  Ceylon  Evidence        Ordinance,  which  was analogous to S. 32(1) of  the  Indian        Evidence  Act.  The Pi-ivy Council affirmed the decision  of        the Supreme Court of Ceylon, and made the following observa-        tions  in the course of their judgment, which would  suggest        that a dying declaration, if found reliable by a jury,  may,        by itself, sustain a conviction:        (1)  I.L.R. [1940] Mad. 158,170.        (2)  A.I.R. 1941 Patna 409.        (3)  I.L.R. [1945] Nag. 613; A.I.R. 1945 Nag. 153.        (4)  [I937] A.C. 220, 229.        567        "...... Apart from the evidence proceeding from the deceased        woman,  the other evidence was not sufficient to  warrant  a        conviction, but at the same time that other evidence was not        merely consistent with the deceased’s statement but  pointed        in  the  same  direction.’ It was.% case in  which,  if  the        deceased’s  statement was received, and was believed, as  it        evidently  was by the jury, to be clear and unmistakable  in        its effect, then a conviction was abundantly justified  and,        indeed, inevitable."        In  ’Phipson on Evidence’, 9th ed., p. 335, the  author  has        discussed the question Whether, a dying declaration  without        other  evidence in corroboration, could be sufficient for  a        conviction,  and has made the following  observations  which        are pertinent to this case :        "...... The deceased then signed a statement implicating the        prisoner, but which was not elicited by question and answer,        and  died on March 20.  It was objected that being begun  in        that  form, it was inadmissible:-Held (1) the questions  and        answers  as to his state of mind were no part of  the  dying        declaration; (2) that even if they were, they only  affected        its weight, not its admissibility ; and (3) that the  decla-        ration  was sufficient, without other evidence, for  convic-        tion (R. v. Fitzpatrick (1910) 46 Ir.  L.T.R. 173, C.C.R)."        Sometimes, attempts have been made to equate a dying  decla-        ration  with the evidence of an accomplice or  the  evidence        furnished  by  a confession as against the maker, if  it  is        retracted, and as against others, even though not retracted.        But,,in our opinion, it is not right in principle to do  so.        Though  under s. 133 of the Evidence Act, it is not  illegal        to  convict a person on the uncorroborated testimony  of  an        accomplice, illustration (b) to s. 114 of the Act lays  down        as  a rule of prudence based on experience, that  an  accom-        plice is unworthy of credit unless his evidence is  corrobo-        rated in material particulars and this has now been accepted        as a rule of law.  The same cannot be said of a dying decla-        ration because a dying declaration may not, unlike a confes-

11

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 12  

      sion,  or the testimony of an approver, come from a  tainted        source.  If a dying        568        declaration has been made by a person whose antecedents  are        as doubtful as in the other cases, that may be a ground  for        looking upon it with suspicion, but generally speaking,  the        maker  of a dying declaration cannot be tarnished  with  the        same brush as the maker of a confession or an approver.        On  a review of the relevant provisions of the Evidence  Act        and  of  the decided cases in the different High  Courts  in        India and in this Court, we have come to the conclusion,  in        agreement with the opinion of the  Full Bench of the  Madras        High Court, aforesaid, (1)    that it cannot be laid down as        an absolute rule of law  that  a  dying  declaration  cannot        form the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated;        (2)  that  each  case must be determined on  its  own  facts        keeping in view the circumstances in which the dying  decla-        ration  was  made  ; (3) that it cannot be laid  down  as  a        general  proposition  that a dying declaration is  a  weaker        kind  of evidence than other pieces of evidence; (4) that  a        dying  declaration  stands on the same  footing  as  another        piece  of  evidence  and has to be judged in  the  light  of        surrounding circumstances and with reference to the  princi-        ples  governing the weighing of evidence; (5) that  a  dying        declaration  which has been recorded by a  competent  magis-        trate  in the proper manner, that is to say, in the form  of        questions  -and answers, and, as far as practicable, in  the        words  of  the maker of the declaration, stands  on  a  much        higher  footing than a dying declaration which depends  upon        oral testimony which may suffer from all the infirmities  of        human, memory and human character, and (6) that in order  to        test  the reliability of a dying declaration, the Court  has        to  keep in view the. circumstances like the opportunity  of        the  dying man for observation, for example,  whether  there        was  sufficient light if the crime was committed  at  night;        whether the capacity of the man to remember the facts stated        had  not been impaired at the time he was making the  state-        ment,  by circumstances beyond his control; that the  state-        ment has been consistent throughout if he had several oppor-        tunities of making a dying declaration apart from the  offi-        cial record of it-; and that the statement had been made  at        the        569        earliest  opportunity and was not the result of tutoring  by        interested parties.        Hence,  in  order to pass the test of reliability,  a  dying        declaration  has to be subjected to a very  close  scrutiny,        keeping in view the fact that the statement has been made in        the absence of the accused who had no opportunity of testing        the  veracity  of the statement by  cross-examination.   But        once  the  court has come to the conclusion that  the  dying        declaration was the truthful version as to the circumstances        of the, death and the assailants of the victim, there is  no        question  of further corroboration. If, on the  other  hand,        the court, after examining the dying declaration in all  its        aspects, and testing its veracity has come to the conclusion        that it is not reliable by itself, and that it suffers  from        an infirmity, then, without corroboration it cannot form the        basis of a conviction.  Thus, the -necessity for  corrobora-        tion arises not from any inherent weakness of a dying decla-        ration  as a piece of evidence, as held in some of  the  re-        ported  cases, but from the fact that the court, in a  given        case, has come to the conclusion that that particular  dying        declaration  was not free from the infirmities  referred  to        above or from such other infirmities as may be disclosed  in

12

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 12  

      evidence in that case.        Having made the general observations bearing on the question        of  the legality of basing a conviction on a dying  declara-        tion alone, and keeping in view the tests set out above, let        us examine the dying declarations now in question before us.        The  most remarkable fact which emerges from an  examination        of  the  three  successive dying declarations  made  in  the        course of about two hours, by the deceased, is that he  con        sistently named the appellant and Tukaram as the persons who        had assaulted him with sword and spear.  The injuries  found        on his person, namely, the punctured wounds and the  incised        wounds  on different parts, of his body, are  entirely  con-        sistent with his statement that he was attacked by a  number        of  persons with cutting and piercing weapons.  No  part  of        his  dying declarations has been shown to be false.  Of  the        two  assailants named by him, Tukaram was convicted  by  the        learned trial judge, but acquitted        570        by the High Court which very reluctantly gave him the  bene-        fit of the doubt created by the similarity of names in  that        locality, as already stated.  There was no such confusion in        the  case  of the appellant.  The  deceased  indicated  that        there  were two more persons concerned in the crime, but  he        could not name them.  The other two accused persons who were        acquitted  by  the courts below had not been  named  in  the        dying declarations and, therefore, their acquittal did  not,        in any way militate against the truth of the dying  declara-        tions.  The courts below also agreed in holding that Babool-        al  was in a position to see his assailants and to  identify        them  in the light of the electric lamp nearby.   They  have        also pointed out that there was no "coaching".  There is  no        doubt, therefore, that Baboolal had been consistent through-        out in naming the appellant as one of his assailants, and he        named  him within less than half an hour of  the  occurrence        and  as  soon as he reached the Mayo Hospital.   There  was,        thus, no opportunity or time to tutor the dying man to  tell        a  lie.  At all material times, he was in a proper state  of        mind in spite of multiple injuries on his person, to  remem-        ber the names of his assailants.  Hence, we have no  reasons        to  doubt  the  truth of the dying  declarations  and  their        reliability.  We have also no doubt that from the legal  and        from the practical points of view, the dying declarations of        the   deceased  Baboolal  are  sufficient  to  sustain   the        appellant’s conviction for murder.  The only other  question        that  remains  to  be considered is whether  there  are  any        extenuating circumstances in favour of the accused  justify-        ing  the lesser of the two sentences prescribed by law.   In        our opinion, there are none.  It was a case of a  deliberate        cold-blooded murder.        For  the  reasons given above, we uphold  the  judgment  and        order  of the High Court convicting the appellant of  murder        and  sentencing him to death.  The appeal  is,  accordingly,        dismissed.        Appeal dismissed.        571