Holding

The dying declaration was admissible as the victim was conscious and the statement was corroborated, and the death was held to be homicide, justifying conviction under Sections 302 and 34.

Summary

The victim Rita was allegedly burnt alive by her husband Om Parkash, his parents Sheela Wanti and Rup Lal, and other relatives after they demanded dowry. Rita gave a detailed statement to the investigating officer after doctors confirmed she was conscious, which was later treated as a dying declaration. The trial court convicted the husband and the High Court also convicted the parents, overturning their earlier acquittal. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that the severe burn injuries rendered Rita incapable of making a reliable dying declaration and that the death was a suicide. The Supreme Court held that medical testimony showed Rita remained conscious for days, making the declaration admissible and corroborated by independent witnesses, and that the circumstances indicated homicide, not suicide. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the convictions under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC.

Issues considered

Whether the dying declaration made by the victim, who suffered severe burn injuries, is admissible and reliable.
Whether the death was a homicide or a suicide, affecting the applicability of Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC.
Whether the court must consider the specific circumstances of dowry‑related deaths when evaluating evidence.

Legislation cited

Indian Evidence Act, 1872s. 32
Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 302, s. 34

Subjects

dowry deathdying declarationhomicidesuicideSection 302 IPCSection 34 IPCEvidence Actcriminal law

Judgment

OM PARKASH ETC. ETC. A
v.
STATE OF PUNJAB

AUGUST 19, 1992

[K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY AND N.P.SINGH, JJ.]
i

Penal Code, 1860-Sections 302, 34-Conviction under-Dowt
death-Dying declaration of victim-Validity of. .

Evidence Act, 1872-Section rAppreciation of evidence-Death due
to bum injurie~Whether suicid~ or homicide-Detennination of-Court's C
duty.

Criminal Trial-Appreciation of evidence-Death due to bum in-
jurie~Whether suicide or homicide-Detennination of-Court's duty.
,
+ The prosecution case was that in the morning, on 17.3.1979 the D
deceased went to the house of her sister (PW. 6). PW. 6's house was in
front of the house of the deceased. The deceased told PW. 6 that the
appellants were compelling her to bring money from her parents.

The appellant in Cr. A. No. 282 of 1981 was the husband, and the E
appellants in Cr.A.No.230of1981 were the mother-in-law and the father-
in-law of the deceased.

At about 2.30 p.m. on 17.3.1979 the deceased was in her room in the
house of the appellants. Her husband along with other co-accused includ·
ing his two sisters caught hold of the deceased and brought her in the F
inner compound of the house. Her father-in-law said that she should be
burnt. The mother-in-law brought the kerosene oil and sprinkled it on her
body. Then deceased's husband set her on fire. She raised the cries 'save·,
me, same me'. Her sister (PW 6) came there along with her father-in-law
(PW 7). They found that the inner door of the house was closed fro~
inside. They pushed the door and entered. At that very time PW 8 and on~ G
Kulbir Chand hearing the cries also entered the house. Seeing the wit·
nesses, the accused persons ran away to the upper storey of the house. The
witnesses extinguished the fire and enquired from the deceased regarding
the occurrence. She told them as to how she was burnt by her husband
with the help of her mother-in· law, father-in-law and two sister-in-laws. H
921
l

922 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1992] 3 S.C.R.

A PW.6 brought the ambulance car and victim was taken to hospital.
Police was informed. ASI came to the hospital. Obtaining the opinion of ~
the Doctor as to whether the deceased was fit to make a statement, he
recorded the statement of the deceased giving the details of the occur- .'
rence. That statement was treated as the first information report. The
deceased succumbed to her injuries on 29.3.1979.
13
After investigation the charge-sheet was submitted against the three
appellants along with the two sisters of the appellant in Cr.A.No.282 of
1981.

c underThe Trial Court convicted the appellant in Cr.A.No. 282 of 1981
section 302 of the Penal Code, and the High Court dismissed his
appeal made against the conviction order. He was sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for life. He was also directed to pay a fine of Rs.
5,000 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The
-
D
'
Trial Court acquitted his mother, father and two sisters of the charges
levelled against them. On an appeal filed on behalf of the State, the High
+
Court set aside the order of acquittal passed against the mother-in-law
and father-in-law of the deceased. They were also convicted under section
302 read with section 34 of the Penal Code. Each one of them was sen-
tenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.
E 5,000 in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.

In these criminal appeals, the appellants challenged the judgments
of the High Court.
~
The appellants submitted that it was always open to the court to
..__
F convict the accused on the basis of a dying declaration but before any such
order of conviction was passed the Court must be satisfied that the dying
declaration said to have been ~ade by tile Yictim before death was genuine
and truthful; that in this case the dying declaration which was said to have
""'.
been made by the deceased before ASI did not appear to be a genuine and
natural statement; that because (If the burn injuries the deceased must not
G
have been in a position to make any such declaration; that reading the
dying declaration as a whole it did not inspire confidence because a person
with burn injuries could not make such a detalied statement; and that the
deceased committed suicide and the appellants were falsely implicated. ~·
H Dismissing the appeals, this C_ourt,
~

OM PARKASH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 923

HELD : 1.01. Unless there are materials on the record to show that the A
~ deceased was not in a position to make a statement it is not possible to reject
her statement which has been treated as dying declaration. [926H, 9J.1A]

• 1.02. P.W.4, a doctor has stated on oath that it was the statement·of
the deceased which was recorded. According to him, she remained cQn-
scious till 11.00 p.m. on March 17, 1979. PW. 2, another doctor, who B
examined the injuries of the deceased before her statement was recorded
also has not mentiOned in his report that she was unconscious. During the
examination of PW 2 no question was put to him that because of the
injuries on the person of the deceased whether she will be in a position to
make the dying decla_ration. There were serious burn injuries on the c
-- person of the deceased, but still she survived till March 29,1979, i.e. for
about twelve days. The deceased was in a position to make any stateme.nt
before ASI. [926E-G]

+ 2.01. Sometimes a case of suicide is presented as a case of homicide
specially when the death is due to burn injuries. But it need not be pointed D
out that whenever the victim of torture commits suicide she leaves behind
some evidence- may be circumstantial in nature- to indicate that it is not
a case of homicide but of suicide. [927F] -

2.02. It is the duty of the Court, in a case of death because of torture
E
and demand for dowry, to examine the circumstances of each case and
evidence adduced on behalf of the parties, for recording a finding on the
question as to how the death has taken place. [927G]
:.-:;;_
I

2.03. While judging the evidence and the circumstances of the case,
the Court has to be conscious of the fact that a death connected with F
dowry takes place inside the house; where outsiders who can be said to be
)..- independent witnesses in the traditional sense are not expected to be
present. The finding of guilt on the charge of murder has to be recorded
on the basis of circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced
before the Court. [927H, 928A]
G

-
2.04. In the instant case, the occurrence took place in the open
,..._ courtyard during the day-time which is not consistent with the theory of
suicide. Apart from that, the dying declaration of the victim along with the
evidence of PWs. 6, 7 and 8 the charges levelled against the appellants are
f~~'!.i~.s~,blished. (9288] H
J

924 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1992] 3 S.C.R.

A CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No.
282of1981.

From the Judgment and Order dated 7.1.1981 of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court in Crl. Appeal No. 1235 of 1979.

B WITH

Criminal Appeal No. 230 of 1981.

Mrs. Kawai Jit Kocher and J.D. Jain for the Appellant.

C S. Bajaj and R.S. Suri for the Respondent.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

N.P. SINGH, J. Appellant Om Parkash has been convicted under
section 302 of the Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous +
D imprisonment for life. He has also been directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 ·
in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.

Appellants Sheela Wanti and Rup Lal, who are the mother and
father of the aforesaid appellant Om Parkash, had been acquitted by the
Trial Court of the charges levelled against them, but on an appeal filed on
E }--·
behalf of the State of Punjab before the High Court the order. of acquittal
has been set aside and they have been convicted under section 302 read
with section 34 of the Penal Code. Each one of them has been sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 in :::-:::.
default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.
F
The prosecution case is that on March 17, 1979 Rita (since deceased)
went to her sister Shushma (PW 6) in the morning who was residing in the
house in front of the house of Rita aforesaid. Rita told her sister that
accused persons were compelling her to bring money from her parents.
'"' "'
The appellant Om Parkash is the husband, Sheela Wanti is the mother-in-
G law and Rup Lal is the father-in-law of Rita aforesaid. It is further the case
of the· prosecution that at about 2.30 p.m. the same day Rita was in her
room in the house of the appellants. Om Parkash along with other co-ac-
cused including his two sisters Kanchan and Shushma (since acquitted)
caught hold of Rita and brought her in the inner compound of the house.
~
-
H Rup Lal the father-in-law of Rita said that she should be burnt. Sheela
-\

OM PARKASH v. STATE OF PUNJAB [N.P.·SINGH, J.) 925

-( Wanti, the mother-in-law, brought the Kerosene oil and sprinkled it on her A
body and then Om Parkash, husband, set her on fire. She raised the cri~s
'save me, save me'. His sister Shushma (PW 6) who, as already stated
above, was living just opposite the house of the appellants came there along
...'
with her father-in-law Bhajan Lal (PW 7). They found the inner door of
the house closed from inside. They pushed the door and entered inside the
B
compound. At that very time Tarsem Lal (PW 8) and Kulbir Chand hearing
the cries also entered in the house. Seeing the witnesses aforesaid inside
the house the accused persons ran away to the upper storey of the house:
The fire was extinguished by the witnesses. They enquired from Rita (since
deceased) regarding the occurrence and she told them as to how she was

- burnt by her husband with the help of her mother-in-law, father-in-law and
sister-in-laws.

Thereafter the ambulance car was brought by Shushma (PW 6) and ·
c

victim was taken to S.G.T.B. Hospital, Amritsar. Police was informed. ASI ·
+ Amritlal of Police Station Kotwali came to the hospital. He obtained the
D
opinion of the Doctor as to whether .Rita was fit to make a statement.
Thereafter at 6.25 p.m. the same evening he recorded the statement of Rita
giving the details of the occurrence. That statement was treated as the first
information report. Rita succumbed to her injuries on March 29, 1979.

-{ After investigation the charge-sheet was submitted against the three 'E
appellants along with the two sisters of appellant Om Parkash. As already
stated above, the Trial Court convicted only appellant Om Parkash and
-: acquitted his mother, father and two sisters of the charges levelled against
them. However, on an appeal filed on behalf of the State of Punjab, the
order of acquittal passed against Sheela Wanti and Rup Lal, the mother-in-
F
law and father-in-law of the deceased, was set aside by the High Court.
')--
The Trial Court as weU as the High Court have placed reliance on
the statement made by the victim which was initiaUy treated as the first
information report but after her death has become her dying declaration.
She has stated in detail as to how the accused persons used to harass her G
for not brining sufficient dowry and pressed her parents to provide suffi·
:;...._ cient cash in lieu of dowry. For that reason she was beaten by the members
of the family !llld sent to her parental home before the occurrence. Only
about 21/22 days befol"e the date of the occurrence due to the intervention
of some rcspecta~le persons she returned to the house of her husband but H
j

926 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1992] 3 S.C.R.

A there was no change in the attitude of the family members.. Thereafter, she )-
has stated as to how on the day of the occurrence she was taken out from
her room and kerosene oil was sprinkled on her body and her-husband Om
Parkash set her on fire with the matchstick. She ais-o stated that hearing
her cries her sister Shushma (PW 6), her father-in-law Bhajan Lal (PW 7) ::.
and others came and extinguished the fire.
B
The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitt':!d that it is
I
always open to the Court to convict the accused on the basis of a dying
declaration but before any such order of conviction is passed the Court
must be satisfied that the dying declaration said to have been made by the
c victim before death is genuine and truthful. She pointed out that the
so-called dying declaration which is said to have been made by Rita before
ASI Amrit Lal does not appear to be a genuine and natural statement.
According to her, because of the burn injuries Rita must not be in a
--
position to make any such declaration. In this connection, she drew our

D
attention to the post mortem examination report of Rita and the findings
of Doctor who held the post mortem examination. It was urged that the
+
Doctor has found second and first degree septic burns on the person of
Rita and as such by 6.25 when she is alleged to have made the dying
declaration, in normal course of the event she must not be in a position to
make any such declaration. Dr. Devinderpal Singh (PW 4) has stated on
E oath that it was the statement of Rita which was recorded. According to
him, she remained conscious till 11.00 p.m. on March 17, 1979. Dr. Harish
Chander Vaid (PW 2), who examined the injuries of Rita before her
statement was recorded, also has not mentioned in his report that she was
unconscious. It may be mentioned that during the examination of aforesaid ;;.-..

Dr. Harish Chander Vaid (PW 2) no question was put to him that because
F
of the injuries on the person of Rita whether she will be in a position to
make the dying declaration. It is true that there were serious burn injuries, ~·

on the person of Rita but still she survived till March 29, 1979'i.e. for about
twelve days. In this background we are not inclined to hold that because
of the burn injuries, Rita was not in a position to make any statement
G before ASI Amrit Lal.

The learned counsel then pointed out that reading the dying decla- _..,
I

ration as a whole it does not inspire confidence because a person with burn
injuries cannot make such a detailed statement. In our opinion unless there
H are materials on the record to show that Rita was not in a position to make
OM PARKASH v. STATE OF PUNJAB [N.P, SINGH, J.) 927

a statement it is not possible to reject her statement which has been treated A
-( as dying declaration. As already mentioned above, Rita was in a position
to make statement has tieen proved by· two Doctors apart from the A.S.I.

Moreover in the present case it cannot be said that the conviction of
the appellants rests solely on the dying declaration of the victim. The
evidence of Shushma (PW 6) sister of the victim, Bhajan Lal (PW 7) B
father-in-law of the sister of the victim, Tarsem Lal (PW 8), who had also
entered in the courtyard, corroborates the statement made by the vict~.
The Trial Court as well as the High Court have discussed their evidence
in detail. They have said as to how hearing the cries of Rita they entered
after forcibly opening the door and saw ,Rita being burnt. Rita told them c
as to how she had been put to fire by the accused persons including these
three appellants. The statement so made by Rita to the three witness~s
aforesaid shall be deemed to be oral dying declaration of the victim. The
witnesses have also stated as to how they extinguished the 'fire and took
her in ambulance to the hospital.
D
It is not in dispute that Sh:ushma (PW 6), sister of the victim, and h(lr
father-in-law Bhajan Lal (PW 7) were staying in a house just oposite to the
house of the accused persons only a road intervening. As such they are the
most natural witnesses and we find no reason to take a contrary view than
the view taken by the High Court, so far as the veracity of the aforesaid E
witnesses are concerned.

It was then submitted on behalf of the appellants that it appears that
Rita committed suicide and the appellants have been falsely implicated for
an offence of murder by the interested witnesses. It is true that sometimes F
a case of suicide is presented as a case of homicide specially when the
death is due to burn injuries. But it need not be pointed out that whenever
the victim of torture commits suicide she leaves behind some evidence .i.-
. may be circumstantial in nature to indicate that it is not a case of homicide
but of suicide. It is the duty of the Court, in a case of death because of
torture and demand for dowry, to examine the circumstances of each case G
and evidence adduced on behalf of the parties, for recording a finding on
the question as to how the death has taken place. While judging the
evidence and the circumstances of the case, the Court has to be conscious
of the fact that a death connected with dowry takes place inside the house,
where outsiders who can be said to be independent witnesses in the H
928 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1992] 3 S.C.R.

A traditional sense, are not expected to be present. The finding of gtiilt on
'the charge of murder has to be recorded on the basis of circumstances of ),-
each case and the evidence adduced before the Court. In the instant case,·
the occurrence took place in the open courtyard during the day-time which
is not consistent with the theory vf suicide. Apart from that, as already
stated above, the Dying Declaration of the victim along with.the evidence
B of PWs 6, 7 and 8, which we find no reason to discard, fully establishes the
charges levelled against the appellants.

In the result, the appeals are dismissed.

V.P.R. Appeals dismissed.

-+-