Kuldeep Choudhary @ Kuldeep Yadav & another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Criminal Appeal, 585 of 2014, Judgment Date: Feb 26, 2021
Law laid down -
Section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - If nature of injuries found on the person of deceased were not grievous in nature and were not sufficient to cause death, oral dying declaration/statement given by him does not fall within the ambit and scope of “dying declaration” envisaged in Section 32(1) of the Act. The Court needs to examine carefully whether injuries on the person are sufficient to cause death and this depends on the factual matrix of each case.
Dying Declaration - If person is promptly hospitalized because of injuries and during treatment developed other complications, death can be said to be natural consequence of injuries caused and not because of any negligence or any external factor. The statement of dying declarant falls within the ambit of Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act.
Opinion of the Doctor/Expert - Courts are not absolutely guided by report of experts. Credibility of expert opinion depends on the reasons stated in support of his conclusion and the data and material furnished which formed the basis for his conclusion. In the instant case, PW29, who conducted the postmortem deposed in the Court that reason of death is cardio vascular failure. In the postmortem report, he also gave a finding that reason of death is because of injuries on the body by hard and blunt object. Thus, his deposition in the Court varies from his finding given in the report. Thus, such statement does not inspire confidence of the Court.
Section 65 of Evidence Act, 1872 – Photocopy of document – The photocopy of document can be treated as 'secondary evidence' provided it satisfies the conditions enumerated in any of the clauses of Section 65 of Indian Evidence Act. In absence of showing original one and existence of original copy to which evidence is the photocopy, the document cannot be treated as secondary evidence.
Oral dying declaration – If such dying declaration is reliable, conviction can be accorded on its basis alone. Requirement of corroboration by Doctor or declaration regarding mental fitness of deceased is merely a rule of prudence.
Section 374 of Cr.P.C.- Judicial Review – If Court below has taken a plausible view in the impugned judgment, no interference is warranted in appellate jurisdiction.
Kuldeep Choudhary @ Kuldeep Yadav & another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh