Dying Declaration Of Deceased With 100% Burn Injuries Reliable If Given In 'Conscious & Fit State Of Mind': Madras High Court

The bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh and Justice KK Ramakrishnan held that the dying declaration can be accepted where it is proved that at the time of making the statement, the declarant was "in a conscious and fit state of mind".

The bench held that the decisive test is not the extent of injuries but whether there is reliable evidence to show that the person was mentally fit.

“Even in cases of extensive, including 100%, burns, a declaration may be accepted if it is established that the declarant was in a conscious and fit state of mind at the time of making the statement. The decisive test is not the extent of the injuries, but whether there is reliable evidence to show that the deceased was mentally fit and capable of making the declaration. Only where there is evidence that the declarant was unconscious or otherwise incapable of making a statement, the dying declaration is liable for rejection,” the court said.

The court thus upheld the conviction and sentence imposed on a man by the Special Court for POCSO Cases in Srivilliputhur for sexually assaulting a minor, recording the incident and criminally intimidating her, which drove her to self-immolation leading to death.

As per the prosecution, the accused had developed a friendship with the victim, who was 17 at the time, through mobile communication. The accused then lured her to a secluded place and committed penetrative sexual assault. He also recorded the act without the victim's knowledge or consent and transmitted the same to her, while criminally intimidating her. Unable to bear the threat, the victim attempted self-immolation, sustaining severe burn injuries. When she was brought to the hospital, an intimation was sent to the police and the Magistrate who came to the hospital and recorded her statement. The girl later succumbed to her injuries.

The trial court found the accused guilty under Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act, and Section 363 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life.

On appeal, the accused argued that the prosecution's case rested substantially on the dying declaration. It was argued that the dying declaration was not reliable or voluntary since the victim had sustained extensive burn injuries at the time and was not in a fit state of mind. It was argued that when the Magistrate reached the hospital for recording the dying declaration, the police were already recording the statement of the victim. He thus argued that there was a possibility that the victim was tutored before giving dying declaration.

On the other hand, the State argued that there was no legal bar on basing the conviction entirely on dying declaration if the same inspires confidence and is found to be truthful and voluntary. It was submitted that in the present case, there was nothing to disbelieve the dying declaration.

The court took note of the dying declaration and noted that the Judicial Magistrate had recorded his satisfaction regarding the mental fitness of the victim prior to recording the statement. The court noted that the Magistrate had also obtained a medical opinion from the attending doctor certifying that the victim was in a fit condition to give a statement and the same was reflected in the dying declaration itself.

The court thus held that the dying declaration was voluntary and free from any embellishment. The court thus found that the dying declaration inspired confidence and there was nothing to show that the victim was tutored.

The court held that the trial court had rightly placed reliance on the dying declaration and there was no reason to interfere with the finding of the trial court. Thus, the court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction.

Counsel for Appellant: Mr. Gopalakrishna Laxmana Raju Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.S.G.L.Rishwanta

Counsel for Respondent: Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

Case Title: M Vigneshwaran v The State

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 234

Case No: Crl.A.(MD).No. 698 of 2023