Som Nath vs State Of Haryana
- SCC(1980) 3 SCC 301
- Neutral1980 INSC 61
- AIRAIR 1980 SC 1226
- SCR[1980] 3 SCR 280
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Dying declarations admissible under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act should not be discredited for gaps, omissions, or lack of particulars, provided the declarations are fundamentally credible; such declarations, being the utterances of a person in extremis under intense physical and mental suffering, cannot be judged by the standards of completeness and detail applicable to ordinary witness testimony. Concurrent findings of fact by two courts cannot be disturbed unless the improbability of the facts found is so extreme as to be manifest on the face of the record.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
ACT: Indian Evidence Act Section 32-Dying Declaration-Value of.
HEADNOTE: The petitioner was found guilty of burning his wife by the Court below. By Special Leave Petition, the Petitioner sought to discredit the dying declarations. Dismissing the Petition, ^ HELD: Concurrent findings of fact cannot be disturbed on enormity of improbability. The dying declarations under Section 32 of the Evidence Act, are the groaning utterances of a dying woman in the grip of dreadful agony which cannot be judged by the standards of fullness of particulars which witnesses may give in other situations. To discredit such dying declarations for shortfalls here and there or even in many places, is unrealistic, unnatural and unconscionable, if basically there is credibility. [280E-G]
JUDGMENT:
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 3478 of 1979.
From the Judgment and order dated 10-8-1979 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 427/77.
N.C. Talukdar, J.P. Malhotra and J.D. Jain for the Petitioner.
The order of the Court was delivered by KRISHNA IYER, J., Wife burning-that atrocious species of murder horrendously escalating in some parts of this country-is the shocking crime proved, according to two courts, by the prosecution in this case. Concurrent findings of fact cannot be disturbed save on enormity of improbability which we are unable to see in the present case. The three dying declarations corroborated by other circumstances are sufficient in our view to bring home the offence. Counsel has sought to discredit these declarations relevant under s. 32 of the Evidence Act forgetting that they are the groaning utterances of a dying woman in the grip of dreadful agony which cannot be judged by the standards of fullness of particulars which witnesses may give in other situations. To discredit such dying declarations for shortfalls here or there or even in many places is unrealistic, unnatural and unconscionable if basically there is credibility. The terrible in this case has taken place in the house and in the presence of the husband who has been convicted. We hardly see any reason for interfering with this conviction, and would have been shocked ourselves if any other course had been adopted either by the trial court or by the High Court. Gender justice has a high place in Indian criminal jurisprudence. Dismissed.
N.K.A. Petition dismissed. 281
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free