ABHISHEK SHARMA (APPELLANT) Vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) (RESPONDENT)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1473 OF 2011
(2JB, ABHAY S. OKA and SANJAY KAROL JJ., delivered by SANJAY KAROL J.)

Facts: This appeal impugns a judgment and order of conviction passed by the High Court of Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 431 of 2009 dated 31 May 2010, confirming the Appellant- Abhishek Sharma’s sentence of life imprisonment under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 18601, as awarded by Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, vide judgment dated 30 April 2009.

Issue: Whether the appellant can be held guilty of murder based on dying declaration where there are multiple by the victim deceased?

Held: The court allowed the present appeal and held that, “placing the gauntlet of guilt upon the convict-appellant based on dying declarations when no other material particulars, apart from his name, could be elicited therefrom would be unjustified. Furthermore, when considering other circumstances that may or may not point to the guilt of the convict-appellant, we find gaps unexplained in the prosecution case, which cast sufficient doubt as to leave the case short of the threshold of beyond reasonable doubt.”

The court further enumerated the following principles for a Court to consider when dealing with a case involving multiple dying declarations:

1. The primary requirement for all dying declarations is that they should be voluntary and reliable and that such statements should be in a fit state of mind
2. All dying declarations should be consistent. In other words, inconsistencies between such statements should be ‘material’ for its credibility to be shaken
3. When inconsistencies are found between various dying declarations, other evidence available on record may be considered for the purposes of corroboration of the contents of dying declarations.
4. The statement treated as a dying declaration must be interpreted in light of surrounding facts and circumstances.
5. Each declaration must be scrutinized on its own merits. The court has to examine upon which of the statement’s reliance can be placed in order for the case to proceed further.
6. When there are inconsistencies, 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.

In the presence of inconsistencies, the medical fitness of the person making such declaration, at the relevant time, assumes importance along with other factors such as the possibility of tutoring by relatives, etc