Supreme Court of India
DASARI PEDA GONDIYYAversusSTATION HOUSE OFFICER, JANGREDDYGUDEM
- Citation
- 2008 INSC 1294
- Decided
- 12 November 2008
- Disposal
- Dismissed
- Bench
- ARIJIT PASAYAT
Holding
The dying declarations were admissible, consistent and established the appellant’s intention to cause death, justifying the conviction under s.302 IPC.
Summary
The appellant, who kept the deceased as his mistress, allegedly poured kerosene on her and set her alight, causing fatal burns. The prosecution relied on three dying declarations recorded by the deceased’s mother, a Mandal Revenue Officer and a Sub‑Inspector of Police, all of which consistently identified the appellant as responsible. The appellant challenged the reliability of these statements and contended there was no intention to kill, arguing s.302 IPC was inapplicable. The Supreme Court held that the dying declarations were admissible, consistent and sufficient to establish the appellant’s culpability and the requisite mens rea for homicide. Consequently, the convictions of the trial and High Courts were affirmed and the appeal was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the dying declarations recorded by different officials are admissible and reliable under the Evidence Act.
- Whether the appellant possessed the intention to cause death, thereby attracting s.302 IPC.
- Whether a conviction for homicide can be sustained solely on the basis of consistent dying declarations.
Legislation cited
Subjects
homicideburningdying declarationIPC s.302Evidence Act s.32intent to killappellate court
Judgment
[2008] 15 S.C.R. 1094
A DASARI PEDA GONDIYYA
v.
STATION HOUSE OFFICER, JANGREDDYGUDEM
(Criminal Appeal No.1162 of 2007)
NOVEMBER 12, 2008
B
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYATAND DR. MUKUNDAKAM
SHARMA~ JJ.]
Penal Code, 1860 - .s.302 - Homicidaldeath due to
C burns - Deceased was mistress of the accused - Multiple
dying declarations - Conviction by Courts below - On appeal,
held: Deceased gave consistent dying dfJc/arations before her
mother, the Manda/ Revenue Officer and the Sub-Inspector
__ of Police pointing out that the accused was responsible for her
D burns - There were reasons as to why aqcused set her on fire
- Factual scenario leaves no manner of-doubt that accused-
appellant was responsible for causing homicidal death of the
deceased - Conviction .accordingly upheld - Evidence Act,
1872- s.32.
E
According to the prosecution, Appellant killed his
mistress by pouring kerosene oil on her and thereafter
setting her on fire. Both Trial Court and High Court
convicted the Appellant under s.302 IPC placing reliance
upon the dying declarations made by the deceased
F before her mother (PW1), the Mandal Revenue Officer
(PW6) and the Sub-Inspector of Police (PW10). Hence the
present appeal.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
G
HELD:1. The dying declarations· given by the
deceased to her mother (PW-1 ), the statement recorded
by PW-10 and the dying declaration recorded by Mandal
Revenue Officer (PW-6) clearly establish that the
H 1094
DASARJ PEDA GONDIYYA v. STATION HOUSE 1095
......._
OFFICER, JANGREDDYGUDEM
-,._ deceased gave a consistent version in the dying A
declarations pointing out that the accused was
responsible for her burns. There were reasons as to why
accused set her on fire. [Para 3] [1097-H; 1098-A]
2. The factual scenario leaves no manner of doubt
B
that the accused was responsible for causing homicidal
death of the deceased. Judgments of the Trial Court and
High Court do not suffer from any infirmity to warrant
interference. [Para 4] (1098-B]
""'
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal c
No. 1162 of 2007.
From the final Judgment and Order dated 8.12.2006 of the
High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in
Criminal Appeal No. 942 of 2005. D
. -1
Harinder Mohan Singh, Kaushal Yadav, Durgesh Yadav
.and Manav Bajaj for the Appellant.
Altaf Fathima and D. Bharathi Reddy for the Respondent.
E
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by.
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is
to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh
High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant for offence
punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 F
(in short the 'IPC'). The accused was charged for allegedly
killing of Thirupathamma (hereinafter referred to as the
'deceased') by pouring kerosene and burning her at 10.00 p.m.
on 29.10.2000 at the house in which she was kept by him as
his mistress. G
2. Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows:
The deceased was the wife of one Narsaiah and he left
her after the birth of a female child and therefore the deceased
H
1096 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 15 S.C.R.
A used to live with her parents. She developed illicit intimacy with
the accused three years prior to the date of occurrence. The
accused kept the deceased in a thatched hut separately and
started living with her. The accused used to drink ID arrack and
beat the deceased by suspecting her character. On 29.10.2000
B at about 6.30 p.m. the accused quarrelled with the deceased
by suspecting her fidelity, beat her and abused her in filthy
language and went away. At about 10.00 p.m. the accused
returned to the house in drunken state, picked up the kerosene ).
tin, poured kerosene on the deceased while she was lying on
c the cot and set fire to her person and fled away from the house
by bolting the door from outside. When the deceased raised
cries, the neighbours came there and found the accused
running away from the house. They opened the door,
extinguished the flames and took the deceased to the hospital.
On receipt of requisition from the hospital, the Sub Inspector
0
of Police (PW-10) reached the hospital, recorded the statement
of the deceased and registered a crime under Section 307
IPC. The Mandal Revenue Officer recorded the dying
declaration of the deceased. Wh.en the motherof the deceased.
(PW-1) questioned the deceased she stated that the accused
E was responsible for burns. While undergoing treatment, the
deceased succumbed to the injuries at about 12.30 p.m. on
2.11.2000. Section of law was altered and FIR was senHo the
· ·concerned court. During the course of ·investigation, the
Inspector of Police, visited the scene of offence, observation.
F report was prepared, inquest was held over the dead body of f -
the deceased and dead body was sent for post-mortem
examination. After receipt of necessary reports and after
completion of the investigation, the police laid the charge sheet.
The plea of the accused was one of denial.
G
In order to establish the accusations, prosecution
examined 12 witnesses. The trial Court referred to the evidence
of PW-1 Owho recorded the dying declaration of the deceased
by Ext.P14. It also referred to the evidence of the Mandal
H Revenue Officer (PW-6) who on receipt of the requisition from
DASARI PEDA GONDIYYAv. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, 1097
JANGREDDYGUDEM [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
).__ the Sub Inspector of Police, proceeded to the Government A
Hospital and found the deceased lying with burn injuries. He
cleared all the persons from that place and recorded the dying
declaration Ext.PS in the presence of the duty doctor PW-7.
Accordingly, conviction was recorded. Appellant preferred an
appeal before the High Court. He took the stand that the dying B
declarations are not reliable. The High Court did not accept the
stand and dismissed the appeal. It was submitted in this appeal
....._ that the dying declaration Ext.P-14 as recorded by PW 10 is
different from what was recorded by the Mandal Revenue
Officer (PW-6). In any event, it was submitted that there was c
no intention to kill the deceased and therefore Section 302 has
no application.
PW-1 is the mother of the deceased who deposed that the
deceased had illicit intimacy with the accused and accused was
beating her frequently on account of suspicion of her character. D
·~ On the date of occurrence, as is evident from the evidence of
PW-10 who recorded the statement of the deceased Ext.P14,
the accused asked her whether she had gone for cutting paddy
crop. When she informed that no sickle was available and,
therefore, she went to some other work, the accused stated that E
there was somebody for her and, therefore, she went to other
work and had beaten her. At about 10.00 p.m. while she was
sleeping on a cot, the accused came in a drunken state and
brought kerosene .and poured it on her and· lit a matchstick.
Immediately, her body caught fire and there were burns all over F
her body'. On hearing her cries, neighbours reached there and
removed her clothes and extinguished the flames by using
gunny bags and she was taken to the Government Hospital. At
the said hospital, the Manda! Revenue Officer (PW-6) recorded
her dying declaration. The doctor PW-7 certified that she was G
conscious to answer and made an endorsement to that effect
in the dying declaration Ext.PS. The endorsement is Ext. P6.
~
3. We find that the declaration given by the deceased to
the mother (PW-1), the statement recorded by PW-10 Ext.P14
H
1098 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 15 S.C.R.
I
A and the dying declaration recorded by Mandal Revenue Officer ~ ,..
(PW-6), Ext.PS clearly establish that the deceased gave a
consistent version in the dying declarations pointing out that the
accused was responsible for her burns. There were reasons
as to why accused set her on fire.
B
4. The factual scenario as described above leaves no
manner of dQubt that the accused was responsible for causing
homicidal death of the deceased. Judgments of the Trial Court
)... .
and High Court do not suffer from any infirmity to warrant
interference.
c
5. The appeal is dismissed.
B.B.B. Appeal dismissed.
~ [
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "homicide"Sign in to search