Deceased's Statement To Media Cannot Be Treated As Dying Declaration At FIR Registration Stage: MP High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that a statement allegedly made by a deceased person before electronic media cannot, at the stage of seeking registration of an FIR, be conclusively treated as a dying declaration. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 368]The bench of Justice Himanshu Joshi dismissed the application by the deceased's wife seeking registration of an FIR against the police officers...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that a statement allegedly made by a deceased person before electronic media cannot, at the stage of seeking registration of an FIR, be conclusively treated as a dying declaration. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 368]
The bench of Justice Himanshu Joshi dismissed the application by the deceased's wife seeking registration of an FIR against the police officers who allegedly assaulted her husband, leading to his death.
"The alleged statement of the deceased before the electronic media cannot, at this stage, be conclusively treated as a dying declaration so as to compel registration of an FIR. Its authenticity, contents and evidentiary value are matters requiring proof. Likewise, payment of e x- g r a t i a assistance by the District Administration cannot by itself establish homicidal death or involvement of the police personnel".
Per the wife's case, on April 16, 2020, during the COVID-19 lockdown, her husband was returning from his field after feeding the cow when he was allegedly assaulted by a police officer posted at Police Station Gora Bazaar. It was alleged that the husband sustained serious injuries but died on April 20, 2020.
The wife further claimed that before his death, his husband spoke to the electronic media and named the police officer responsible for his assault. The petitioner also stated that the District Administration granted ₹50,000 as ex gratia assistance to the family.
The wife further submitted that she had filed complaints to the Superintendent of Police along with photographs, newspaper cuttings, and merg information. However, no FIR was registered.
Therefore, the wife approached the JMFC. After calling for a police report, the JMFC found that an inquiry had already been conducted in the merg proceedings and declined to direct the registration of an FIR.
However, the court treated the wife's complaint as a private complaint under Section 200 of the CrPC and directed her to proceed in accordance with the law. She then filed a revision, which was also dismissed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge. Aggrieved, the wife approached the High Court.
The counsel for the wife claimed that the court below failed to take into consideration the statement of the deceased before the electronic media. It was submitted that photographs, medical documents, and a grant of ex gratia assistance also support the allegation of the assault. Hence, she is seeking direction under Section 156(3) of CrPC, which empowers the judicial magistrate to order the registration of an FIR and police investigation.
The counsel for the respondent opposed the application, claiming that there was no illegality in the orders passed by the court below. It was argued that a merg investigation was conducted, statements of relevant persons were recorded, and CCTV footage and other material were examined. It was further argued that the medical material does not support the allegation that the death was caused by the alleged assault. The magisterial and police inquiries did not substantiate the allegation of assault by a police officer.
The court noted that the Magistrate, after considering the police report and evidence collected during merg proceedings, declined to direct registration of an FIR but treated the application as a complaint under Section 200 CrPC. Section 200 CrPC, which empowers a magistrate to take cognizance of an offense based on private complaint.
The court noted that such a course was permissible in law. The court noted that the wife was not denied a remedy and could lead evidence before the Magistrate. The magistrate is competent to proceed under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC and to adopt procedure permissible under law, if circumstances so warrant.
The court further dismissed the allegation that the post-mortem report was manipulated. The court noted that it cannot undertake comparative appreciation of such material under the exercise of inherent jurisdiction.
Thus, the bench held that the wife has an efficacious remedy before the Magistrate and no jurisdictional error, perversity, or manifest illegality was found. Thus, the application was dismissed.
Case Title: Poonam Kushwaha v Alok Singh
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 368
For Petitioner: Advocate Arvind Kumar Shrivastava
For Respondent 1 to 5: Advocate Hitendra Golhani
For State: Advocate Somesh Gupta