Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has said a dying declaration even without independent corroboration can be the sole basis of conviction, as it confirmed conviction of a man for setting ablaze his widowed sister in law, while relying solely upon the statement of the deceased.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta upheld the Allahabad High Court's judgment which dismissed a plea against conviction of appellant Pappi alias Mashkoor for murder of Shahin Parveen on December 1, 2016.

Before her death, she made a dying declaration accusing her brother-in-law, his wife and the wife's brother of setting her ablaze as she resisted their attempts to enter into immoral trafficking and prostitution.

The appellant contended the conviction is based only on the dying declaration of the deceased. He also claimed that the dying declaration is not free from doubt. 

Referring SC judgment in 'Atbir Vs Government of NCT of Delhi' (2010), the bench said it has been clearly held that dying declaration can be the sole basis of the conviction if it inspires the full confidence of the court.

The court is required to satisfy itself that the deceased was in a fit state of mind at the time of making the statement and that it was not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination, the bench said. 

It has further been held that, where the court is satisfied about the dying declaration being true and voluntary, it can base its conviction without any further corroboration, the bench added. 

"It has further been held that there cannot be an absolute rule of law that the dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. It has been held that the rule requiring corroboration is merely a rule of prudence. The court has observed that if after careful scrutiny, the court is satisfied that it is true and free from any effort to induce the deceased to make a false statement and if it is coherent and consistent, there shall be no legal impediment to make it the basis of conviction, even if there is no corroboration," the bench said.

In the case at hand, the bench said the material placed on record would reveal that the deceased was in a fit state of mind at the time of making the statement and that it was not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination.

"We have no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact that the dying declaration is true and free from any effort to induce the deceased to make a false statement. The dying declaration is coherent and consistent and as such, there should be no legal impediment to make it the basis of conviction without there being any independent corroboration. We find that the dying declaration is cogent, trustworthy and reliable to base the conviction on the same," the bench said.

Going by the statement of the victim, the bench noted the victim stated that she had a quarrel with her devar Pappi alias Mashkoor over partition of the house. It can further be seen that the role of pouring kerosene on the victim and setting her ablaze is also attributed to Mashkoor. However, so far as Naeema (wife of accused no Mashkoor) and her brother Naeem are concerned, she stated that they aided Mashkoor without assigning any specific role of how they assisted him, the bench said.

"We therefore find that, though the said dying declaration can be the sole basis of maintaining the conviction of accused No 1 Pappi alias Mashkoor, in the absence of any specific role attributed to accused No 2 Naeema and accused No 3 Naeem, they are entitled to the benefit of doubt," the bench said.

The court allowed appeal filed by Naeem and Naeema and acquitted them of all the charges. It, however, dismissed appeal filed by Mashkoor.