{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3831 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra APPLICANT VERSUS Kishor Rambhau Shinde RESPONDENT ....... Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for applicant-State ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] DATE : 30th September 2010 PER COURT: 1. This is an application filed by the State challenging the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kopargaon dated 30.03.2010 in Sessions Case No.34/2007, acquitting the respondent for an offence punishable u/s 302, 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Before the trial court, the prosecution has heavily relied on two dying declarations at Exhibit-44 and Exhibit-69, recorded by PW-8, police officer and PW-10 Special Executive Magistrate. In respect of the dying declaration at Exhibit-44, the {2} trial court, upon appreciation of the evidence, came to the conclusion that undisputedly Exhibit-44 had not been scribed by PW-8 and the scribe of the dying declaration at Exhibit-44 had not been examined by the prosecution. In such circumstances, therefore, the trial court concluded that no reliance, whatsoever, could be placed on the dying declaration at Exhibit-44. In respect of Exhibit-69, recorded by PW-10, the trial court firstly found that the endorsement of the Medical Officer had been obtained on a blank requisition, in the sense that the name of the patient had not been written. Moreover, the original of the document on which the endorsement of the medical officer had been obtained was not produced before the trial court. The trial court further found from the evidence of the medical officer that he put the endorsement and, thereafter left and was not present during the recording of the dying declaration. Evidence of PW-10 indicates that he had questioned the injured and had come to a subjective conclusion that the injured was in a fit condition to give statement, despite the fact that she had sustained nearly 100% burns. Learned APP has made available to us the deposition of PW-10 and upon reading the same it transpired that PW-10 has not proved the contents of Exhibit-69. In this behalf, a reference may usefully be made to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in “Jivan Tulsiram Dhavali & Another V/s State of Maharashtra” 2008 ALL MR (Cri) 2018. The Division has held in the said judgment that it is incumbent for the scribe to depose about the contents of the dying declaration and merely accepting the dying declaration as a {3} document, without formal proof of the contents would not amount the proof of the dying declaration. 3. With the assistance of the learned APP we have also perused the other findings recorded by the trial court in respect of 3 alleged oral dying declarations. The trial court has given reasons as to why he had come to the conclusion that no reliance, whatsoever, could be placed upon the testimony of the witnesses who had deposed about the oral dying declarations. Coupled with this, the accused had examined two defence witnesses, who had recorded the version of the injured first in the point of time in which the injured had stated that she had sustained burn injuries on account of accidental bursting / flaring of the stove. In that light of the matter, therefore, according to us, there is no perversity in the reasoning of the trial court to warrant any interference in this appeal against the acquittal. In that light of the matter, therefore, criminal application is dismissed. Leave refused. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] [P.V.HARDAS, J.] drp/B10/criapln3831-10