Murder over half-burnt cigarette: Supreme Court upholds man’s conviction 27 years on

The Supreme Court bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Prasanna B Varale dismissed a man’s appeal against his conviction for murdering a tea stall owner.

“It is well settled by a catena of decisions of this court that a truthful and voluntary dying declaration, if found to be reliable, can by itself form the sole basis of conviction without the necessity of corroboration,” the bench added.

‘Quarrel over half-burnt cigarette’

• On December 11, 1998, a quarrel broke out between the appellant and the tea stall owner after the appellant threw a half-burnt cigarette into a bucket used by the other person for washing cups and saucers.
• The following day, the owner was allegedly found lying injured near his tea stall, having sustained multiple blows.
• The man kept repeating to the witness that the appellant had injured him, and it was declared multiple times until he arrived at the hospital, where he was declared dead.
• The witness subsequently lodged a police complaint, and the appellant was detained, and the weapon of offence was allegedly discovered.
• Upon appreciation of the evidence on record, the trial court in Ahmedabad concluded that the appellant was guilty of the offences under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 135 (contravention of rules/orders)of the Bombay Police Act.
• The appellant moved an appeal before the Gujarat High Court, which was dismissed.

‘Prosecution’s case beyond reasonable doubt’

The Supreme Court observed that the witness’s hostility was confined to not having actually seen the appellant assaulting the deceased. However, the testimony consistently established that the deceased was found lying in a pool of blood at the scene of the offence. 

The apex court opined that the appeal deserved to be dismissed in limine (at the outset) for the reason that the prosecution had succeeded in proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and there was no reason to take a different approach from that of the concurrently recorded by the trial court and the Gujarat High Court concerning the veracity and reliability of the testimony, the Supreme Court added.

The top court stressed that although most of the panch witnesses and eyewitnesses turned hostile, PW1 and PW12 had fully proved the prosecution’s case beyond a reasonable doubt.

‘Dying declaration, doubtful’

• Advocate K Sarada Devi, the counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that the prosecution’s case was based mainly on the complainant’s version and the alleged oral dying declaration.
• She argued that the independent witnesses who informed the complainant and were said to be present at the scene of the crime were not examined.
• It was contended that since there were no credible eyewitnesses, and most of the other witnesses had turned hostile, the dying declaration was doubtful, with serious contradictions and procedural lapses. 
• On the other hand, advocate Swati Ghildiyal, appearing for the state, supported the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant.

‘Order of conviction fully justified’

The Supreme Court said that the trial court justified recording the order of conviction and sentence against the appellant, as the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

The judgment, affirmed by the Gujarat High Court, did not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference by this court, the Supreme Court said while dismissing the appellant’s plea on the ground of lacking merit.

The Supreme Court affirmed that the dying declaration was not only found reliable but also stood corroborated by the surrounding circumstances, particularly the testimony.

Rejecting the contention raised on behalf of the defence that the injured deceased could not have been in a fit state of mind to make a dying declaration, the Supreme Court agreed with the reasoning assigned by the Gujarat High Court while dismissing the defence’s submission.