Doctor's Opinion On Victim's Consciousness Prevails Over Police Assessment In Evaluating Dying Declaration: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of a husband for committing the murder of his wife based on her dying declaration, noting that a mere discrepancy in the investigation officer's statements would not discredit the dying declaration when the doctor has approved the deceased's fit state of mind to give statements. A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N. Bhatti dismissed the husband's appeal, upholding the Karnataka High Court's judgment to convict him for the offences of murder (Section 302 IPC) and Cruelty (Section 498-A IPC). The prosecution's case was that on the fateful night, a quarrel started between the couple, leading to the setting ablaze of the deceased wife by the Appellant-husband upon pouring kerosene over her. The deceased was taken to the hospital, where the Doctor approved the deceased's fit state of mind to give the dying declaration, which was duly recorded by the investigation officer. The authenticity of the dying declaration was questioned by the Appellant-defence, arguing about the inconsistency in the testimony of the investigation officer, who had deposed that the deceased was in an unconscious state and not in a position to speak, thereby leading to no credible evidence to prove that the appellant had committed the offence as alleged. Aggrieved by the High Court's decision to reverse the trial court's decision to acquit him, the Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. Affirming the High Court's decision, the judgment authored by Justice Mithal observed that once the doctor had certified the deceased's fit of mind to give dying declaration, the investigation officer's statement to the contrary would be overridden by the doctor's certification to the deceased's conscious state of mind to make dying declaration. “The Trial Court was not justified in acquitting the appellant on slight discrepancies in the statements of some of the witnesses, particularly. PW-16 is the police inspector who conducted the investigation. He might have deposed that the deceased was not in a conscious state of mind but that would not override the statement of the doctors who treated the deceased, especially the one who was on duty and had permitted the police to record the statement of the deceased on being satisfied that she was in a fit condition to make a statement.”, the court observed. “…we are of the opinion that the High Court is perfectly justified in the facts and circumstances of the case that the appellant is guilty of commission of offences both under Sections 498A and 302 IPC and has rightly been convicted and sentenced to the imprisonment awarded.”, the court held. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.HeadnoteIndian Penal Code, 1860; Section 302 and Section 498A - Evidence Act, 1872; Section 32 - Dying Declaration - Reliability of Dying Declaration in cases of high percentage of burns - Conviction Upheld – The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's reversal of an acquittal, affirming the conviction of the appellant for murdering his wife by pouring kerosene and setting her on fire - held that even with 80-90% burn injuries, a dying declaration is reliable if the attending doctors certify the patient was in a fit and conscious state to make a statement - The evidence of the victim's daughter (PW-3), who was an eyewitness to the appellant fetching kerosene and setting the deceased on fire, was found to be "clinchingly" credible - Supreme Court dismissed the defense's argument regarding inconsistencies in witness testimonies (PW-7 and PW-16), noting that the professional medical opinion of the treating doctors (PW-10 and PW-11) carries more weight regarding the deceased's mental capacity than the contradictory statements of other witnesses - noted that a mere discrepancy in the investigation officer's statements would not discredit the dying declaration when the doctor has approved the deceased's fit state of mind to give statements. [Paras 11-23]Cause Title: SUBRAMANI VERSUS STATE OF KARNATAKACitation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 255Click here to download judgmentAppearance: For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shekhar G Devasa, Sr. Adv.(argued by) Mr. Manish Tiwari, Adv. Mrs. Thashmitha Muthanna, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kini, Adv. Mr. Shashi Bhushan Nagar, Adv. M/S. Devasa & Co., AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Sanchit Garga, AOR (argued by) Mr. Kunal Rana, Adv. Mr. Shashwat Jaiswal, Adv. Ms. Aarohi Garg, Adv.

Doctor's Opinion On Victim's Consciousness Prevails Over Police Assessment In Evaluating Dying Declaration: Supreme Court

Yash Mittal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Yash Mittal

Doctor's Opinion On Victim's Consciousness Prevails Over Police Assessment In Evaluating Dying Declaration: Supreme Court

Yash Mittal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Yash Mittal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers