Headline
The Supreme Court of India warns against conviction based solely on Oral Dying Declarations to Close Relatives.
Summary
The Supreme Court of India in a murder case,upheld the acquittal of an accused , stressing that courts must exercise caution when depending on oral dying declarations made to close relatives. The Supreme Court shows that such evidence should be examined for consistency, mainly when prior statements fail to mention the dying declaration.
Key Facts
- Case Name: The State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Ramjan Khan & Ors.
- Judges Name: Justice CT Ravikumar and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia
- The prosecution based its case on the testimony of the mother, claiming her deceased son made an oral dying declaration indicating the accused.
- Inconsistency emerged as the mother, who was also the informant, did not initially mention this in her Section 161 Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC ) statement.
- The High Court found her trial-stage statement untrustworthy , leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Legal Insights
The Supreme Court of India stressed that while an FIR need not elaborate every fact, contradictions between it and later testimony can challenge witness credibility under Sections 145 and 157 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Impact
This judgment shows caution in convictions solely based on uncorroborated verbal dying declarations, especially when inconsistencies exist in witness testimony.
Why it Matters
This ruling of the Supreme Court showcases the requirement for reliable evidence and consistency in statements, especially when a conviction relies on a close relative’s testimony about a verbal dying declaration.
Source:
Also Read– Oral evidence
