This Supreme Court judgment clarifies the legal principle regarding multiple dying declarations. The Supreme Court held that each declaration must be assessed independently for evidentiary value. It ruled that the first, corroborated dying declaration recorded by an independent witness (a doctor) was reliable, and minor discrepancies in subsequent versions did not invalidate it, justifying the High Court’s reversal of the acquittal.
Facts Of The Case:
The prosecution’s case was that the appellant, Jemaben, conspired with a co-accused to kill Leelaben and her son, Ganesh. On the intervening night of November 29-30, 2004, while the victims were sleeping in their hut, Jemaben poured kerosene on Leelaben and set her on fire. Leelaben suffered severe burns and succumbed to her injuries on December 4, 2004. Her young son also sustained 10-12% burn injuries. The case rested primarily on dying declarations made by the deceased. Leelaben gave three statements, the first being to the attending doctor at the hospital, where she explicitly named her aunt-in-law, Jemaben, as the perpetrator who set her ablaze after a dispute. The Trial Court acquitted both accused, citing discrepancies between the three dying declarations. The Gujarat High Court reversed this acquittal for Jemaben, convicting her under Section 302 of the IPC and sentencing her to life imprisonment. The Supreme Court, in appeal, upheld the High Court’s decision, emphasizing the reliability of the first, medically certified dying declaration, which was corroborated by physical evidence like an empty kerosene container and the smell of kerosene at the scene.
Procedural History:
The procedural history of the case commenced with the Sessions Court (Fast Track Court, Deesa) acquitting the appellant-accused in 2005, primarily due to perceived discrepancies in the deceased’s multiple dying declarations. The State of Gujarat challenged this acquittal by filing Criminal Appeal No. 539 of 2006 before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. In 2016, the High Court allowed the state’s appeal, set aside the acquittal, and convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, sentencing her to life imprisonment. The appellant then filed Criminal Appeal No. 1934 of 2017 before the Supreme Court of India, which, in its judgment dated October 29, 2025, dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court’s conviction and sentence.
READ ALSO:“Mere Suspicion Not Proof”:Supreme Court Landmark Ruling on Circumstantial Evidence