STATE OF GUJARAT versus JAYRAJBHAI PUNJABHAI VARU
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 265, Supreme Court of India, 2016
Outcome: Dismissed (Dismissed)
Segment: Ratio
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 265 
STATE OF GUJARAT 
v. 
JAYRAJBHAIPUNJABHAIVARU 
(Crimina!Appea!No. 1236of2010) 
JULY 11,2016 
[KURIAN JOSEPH AND R.K. AGRAWAL, JJ.] 
Evidence Act, 1872 - s. 32 - Dying declaration - Death of 
wife by sustaining 90% burn injuries - Statement/dying declaration 
made by wife before polic<; officer and Executive Magistrate as 
also oral dying declaration before her father - Conviction of 
husband uls. 302 and sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment by 
the trial court - However, acquittal by the High Court - On appeal, 
held: There were two sets of evidence, one the statement made before 
police officer and Executive Magistrate wherein deceased did not 
name her husband or her family members and other the oral dying 
declaration made by the deceased before her father who deposed 
about the cruelty and ill behavior meted out to the deceased at her 
matrimonial home - On a careful scrutiny of the materials on record, 
it is found that both the statements before the police officer and 
Executive Magistrate are consistent, reliable and fully corroborated 
- There is no contradiction as to the role of the husband- It becomes 
very clear that there was no involvement of husband in the 
commission of offence - Conviction could not be placed on the sole 
testimony of the father of deceased - Thus, order passed by the 
High Court upheld - Penal Code, 1860 - s. 302. 
Dying declaration - Reliance upon - Held: Courts below need 
to be extremely careful while dealing with
a dying declaration since 
maker not available for cross-examination - Mechanical approach 
in relying upon a dying declaration is extremely dangerous - Court 
to consider and weigh all the attendant circumstances and come to 
the independent finding whether dying declaration was properly 
recorded and was voluntary and truthful - Dying declaration should 
be of such a nature as to inspire full confidence of the Court in its 
correctness - Further, in case of more than one dying declaration, 
the intrinsic contradictions in those dying declarations are extremely 
265 
265 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H
266 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016) 3 S.C.R. 
important - It cannot be that a dying declaration which supports 
the prosecution alone can be accepted while the other innocent 
dying declarations have to be rejected - However, the courts below 
are fully entitled to act on the dying declarations and make them 
the basis of conviction, where dying declarations pass all the said 
tests - Once the court is convinced that dying declaration is so 
recorded, it may be acted upon and made a basis of conviction. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. The courts below have to be extremely careful 
when they deal with a dying declaration as the maker thereof is 
not available for the cross-examination which poses a great 
difficulty to the accused person. A mechanical approach in relying 
upon a dying declaration just because it is there is extremely 
dangerous. The court has to examine a dying declaration 
scrupulously with a microscopic eye to find out whether the dying 
declaration is voluntary, truthful, made in a conscious state of 
mind and without being influenced by the relatives present or by 
the investigating agency who may be interested in the success of 
investigation or which may be negligent while recording the dying 
declaration. A number of times the relatives influence the 
investigating agency and bring about a dying declaration. The 
dying declarations recorded by the investigating agencies have 
to be very scrupulously examined. The
court has to weigh all the 
attendant circumstances and come to the independent finding 
whether the dying declaration was properly recorded and whether 
it was voluntary and truthful. In case of more than one dying 
declaration, the intrinsic contradictions in those dying declarations 
are extremely important. It cannot be that a dying declaration 
which supports the prosecution alone can be accepted while the 
other innocent dying declarations have to be rejected. Such a 
trend will be extremely dangerous. However, the courts below 
are fully entitled to act on the dying declarations and make them 
the basis of conviction, where the dying declarations pass all the 
above tests. The courts must bear in mind that each criminal 
trial is an individual aspect. It may differ from the other trials in 
some or the other respect and, therefore,-a mechanical approach 
to the law of dying declaration has to be shunned. [Paras 10, 11) 
J275-H; 276-A-~l 
2.1 It is evident from the material on record that Rekhaben
STATE OF GUJARAT v. JAYRAJBHAI PUNJABHAI VARU 
was removed to the hospital with burn injuries and her statement 
was recorded by PW-6, who was discharging duty with the Police 
at the hospital. The dying declaration of the deceased was 
recorded by the Executive Magistrate after following the due 
process of law. In both the statements given by the deceased to 
the Police Authorities as well as Executive Magistrate, the 
deceased did not name her husband or his family members. 
Though when a specific question was put to her that what exactly 
happened on that night, she narrated that on 10.03.2003, at about 
5 o'clock in the morning, when all other family members were 
sleeping in the house, an unknown person came near her and 
took her into the kitchen. She further narrated that he poured 
kerosene on her and set her on fire and went away from the place. 
She further gave a statement that the unknown person was an 
outsider who was wearing white clothes. On hearing her cries, 
other family members also woke up and admitted her in the 
hospital. There is no denying the fact that the deceased was in 
her matrimonial home at the time of the incident and all other 
family members "were also present in the house at the relevant 
time. In both the dying declarations recorded by two independent 
witnesses after following the due process of law, she gave a 
statement that the person was unknown and there was no 
involvement of her in-laws or husband. Both the statements are
consistent and there is no contradiction as to the role of the 
respondent-husband. From a perusal of the statements, it 
becomes very clear that there was no involvement of the 
respondent in the commission of offence. [Paras 6, 7] (271-E-F; 
273-H; 274-A-D] 
2.2 In the instant case, there are two sets of evidence, one 
is the statement/declaration made before the police officer and 
the Executive Magistrate and the other is the oral dying 
declaration made by the deceased before her father who was 
examined as PW-1. PW-1 deposed about the cruelty and ill 
behavior meted out to the deceased at her matrimonial home. 
On a careful scrutiny of the materials on record, it cannot be said 
that there were contradictions in the statements made before 
the police officer and the Executive Magistrate as to the role of 
267 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
the respondent in the commission of the offence and in such 
circumstances, one set of evidence which is more consistent and 
reliable, which in the instant case being one in favour of the 
H
268 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
respondent, requires to be accepted and conviction could not be 
placed on the sole testimony of PW-1. [Para 10] [276-C-D] 
·•
2.3 On appreciation of evidence on record, the view that the 
dying declarations of the deceased recorded by the police officer 
~
as well as the Executive Magistrate are fully corroborated and 
B 
there is no inconsistency as regards the role of the respondent 
in the commission of offence. A dying declaration is entitled to 
great weight. The conviction basing reliance upon the oral dying 
declaration made to the father of the deceased is not reliable and 
such a declaration can be a result of afterthought. This is the 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
reason the Court also insists that the dying declaration should 
be of such a nature as to inspire full confidence of the Court in its 
correctness. The Court has to be on guard that the statement of 
deceased was not as a result of tutoring, prompting or a product 
of imagination. The Court must be further satisfied that the 
deceased was in a fit state of mind after a clear opportunity to 
observe and identify the assailants. Once the Court is satisfied 
that the declaration was true and voluntary, undoubtedly, it can 
base its conviction without any further corroboration. It cannot 
be laid down as an absolute rule of law that the dying declaration 
cannot form the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. 
The rule requiring corroboration is merely a rule
of prudence. 
[Para 12] [277-A-E] 
2.4 The evidence available on record and the sole evidence 
of the father of the deceased as compared to the dying declaration 
do not inspire confidence in the mind of this Court to make it the 
basis for the conviction of the respondent-accused. [Para 14) [277-
G-H] 
3. The burden of proof in criminal law is beyond all reasonable 
doubt. The prosecution has to prove the guilt of the accused 
beyond all reasonable doubt and it is also the rule of justice in 
criminal law that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced 
in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other 
towards his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused 
should be adopted. [Para 13] [277-F-G) 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
1236of2010. 
H 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.07.2009 of the High Court
STATE OF GUJARAT v. JAYRAJBHAI PUNJABHAI VARU 
269 
of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 976 of2003. 
A 
Ms. Jesal, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Advs. for the Appellant. 
S. Sankararama Krishnan (A.C.), Adv. for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
R.K. AGRAWAL, J. I. This appeal has been filed against the 
judgment and order dated 16.07 .2009 passed by the High Court of Gujarat 
at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 976 of 2003 whereby the High 
Court allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein against the 
judgment and order dated 30.06.2003 passed by the Court of Sessions 
Judge, Amreli in Sessions Case No. 20/2003. 
, 
2. Brief facts: 
(a)Rekhaben (since deceased) was married to Jayrajbhai Punjabhai 
Varu-the respondent herein and was residing at Gopalgram, Taluka 
Chalala, Gujarat along with her in-laws, viz., Punjabhai LakhabhaiVaru-
father-in-law, Manuben Punjabhai-mother-in-law and Ramjuben 
Punjabhai-sister-in-law. 
(b)On I 0.03.2003, Rekhaben was admitted to the Government 
Hospital, Amreli with 90 per cent burn injuries. A First Information 
Report (FIR) being No. 7/03 got registered under Section 307 of the 
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'the IPC') wherein she stated that on 
10.03.2003, at about 5 o'clock in the morning, when all other family 
members were sleeping in the house, an unknown person came near her 
and told her that he had come to take her. By saying so, he took her into 
the kitchen, poured kerosene on her and by
lighting the matchstick set 
her on fire and went away from the place and, consequently, she started 
burning in flames. She further gave a statement that the unknbwn person 
was an outsider who was wearing white clothes. On hearing her cries, 
other family members also woke up and admitted her in the hospital at 
Amreli. It may be mentioned here that the above said FIR was registered 
on the basis of the statement given by the deceased herselfon I 0.03.2003, 
at about 7:30 a.m., in the hospital to Shri Bhikhu Karsanbhai, P.S.O., 
Amreli City which was treated as a complaint. In the said statement, 
the thumb impression of Rekhaben was identified by Vala Jaskubhai 
Suragbhai - the father of the deceased. 
( c )On the very same day, at 8:25 a.m., she made a statement before . 
the Executive Magistrate, Amreli and narrated the whole incident. In 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H
270 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 
the afternoon, Rekhaben succumbed to her injuries. On the basis of the 
statement given by the deceased, Jayrajbhai Punjabhai Varu-the 
respondent herein, Punjabhai Lakhabhai Varn-father-in-law, Manuben 
Punjabhai-mother-in-law and Ramjuben Punjabhai-sister-in-law were 
arrayed as accused and a chargesheet was filed under Sections 302, 
201 and 34 of the !PC and the case was committed to the Court of 
Sessions and numbered as Sessions Case No. 20/2003. 
(d)The Sessions Judge, Amreli, vide order dated 30.06.2003, 
convicted the husband of the deceased under Section 302 of the !PC 
and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life while acquitting 
the other accused persons. 
( e )Being aggrieved, the respondent herein filed a Criminal Appeal 
No. 976 of2003 before the High Court of Gujarat. The Division Bench 
of the High Court, vi de order dated 16.07 .2009, allowed the appeal. 
(f) Aggrieved by the order dated 16.07.2009 acquitting the husband 
of the deceased ofall the charges, the State has filed this appeal by way 
of special leave before this Court. 
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 
4. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submitted that the 
relations between the deceased and the respondent herein were strained 
and the deceased was compelled to withdraw from her matrimonial home 
several times. The deposition of Jaskubhai Suragbhai (PW-I )-father of 
the
deceased shows that she was subjected to torture, both mental and 
physical, before she succumbed to the injuries. It was contended that 
the deceased was compelled to give false and wrong statement/ 
declaration before the police as well as before the Executive Magistrate 
by the accused. It was further contended that the accused persons 
caused physical cruelty to the deceased during the intervening night of 
the incident and poured kerosene upon her and set her on fire. The 
statement given by P. W. I is consistent and his evidence is getting absolute 
corroboration with the circumstantial evidence which is available on 
record. His evidence remained unimpeached during the course of the 
trial and there is no reason for which his evidence can be side lined. 
Learned counsel for the State vehemently contended that the deceased 
Rekhaben died under mysterious circumstances in the house which was 
occupied and possessed by the accused person for which the accused 
has not offered reasonable explanation, therefore, the presumption as
STATE OF GUJARAT v. JAYRAJBHAI PUNJABHAI VARU 
[R.K. AGRAWAL, J.] 
provided under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act is required to be 
drawn and such presumption has not been rebutted by offering reasonable 
explanation. 
5. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that the 
prosecution has relied upon the testimony of PW-I - father of the 
deceased who had claimed that the deceased narrated the whole incident 
to him but he informed the same to the police after performing the 
cremation ceremony and there is every opportunity for possible concoction 
of a false version. Learned counsel further submitted that the deceased 
had not named any of the accused in her dying declaration which was 
recorded by two independent witnesses on two different occasions and 
in both the dying declarations she had stated that the person who poured 
the kerosene and set her on fire was a stranger and not known to her. 
Learned counsel further submitted that Dilubhai Valerabhai- a close 
relative of PW- 1, who accompanied him to see the deceased in the 
hospital has denied having any conversation with the deceased. It was 
further submitted that the evidence adduced by the prosecution are not 
worth acceptance and are not sufficient to draw the inference of guilt of 
the accused, therefore, the respondent herein should be exonerated of 
the charges leveled against him. 
6. It is evident from the material on record that Rekhaben was 
removed to the hospital with bum injuries and her
statement was recorded 
by Bhikhubhai Karsanbhai Parmar (PW-6), who was discharging duty 
with the Police at the hospital. The dying declaration of the deceased 
was recorded by the Executive Magistrate after following the due process 
oflaw. In view of the above, it is relevant to quote the relevant portion of 
the statements given by the deceased before the police authorities as 
well as the Executive Magistrate which are as under:-
" Date: 10.03.2003 
My name is Rekhaben w/o Jayrajbhai Pujbhai Varu, Kathi Darbar 
by caste, aged 25 years, occupation: household, Res. Gopalgram, 
Taluka Chalala. 
On being asked in person at Armeli illegible I state that I am 
residing at above mentioned address with my mother in law, father 
in law and husband and my husband is doing work of cutting 
diamond at illegible. My parents are residing at Vandiya village 
and name of my father is Jasubhai Vala and I was married before 
271 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H
272 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 
about two years from today. I have no child. 
Today in the early morning at about Five O'clock the members of 
my family were sleeping outside during that an unknown person 
came near me and he woke me up and told me that wake up I 
have come to take you, by saying so he took me in kitchen and 
poured kerosene on me and kindled match and this unknown 
outsider person went away. This unknown person was outsider 
and he had put on white cloths and I was started burning on my 
whole body, therefore I was shouting so persons of my house 
woke up and they got me admitted here in Amreli Government 
hospital here. Here my treatment is continued. I am conscious. I 
have no harassment of my mother in law, father in law or my 
husband. 
The said incident has taken place today in early morning at about 
Five O' clock any outsider unknown person got me woke up and 
took me in kitchen where he poured kerosene lying there and 
kindled and threw match on me and this unknown person went 
away and this person was outsider. 
Such my fact as stated by me is true and correct. 
Before 
Sd/- Bhikhu Karsanbhai 
P.S.O. Amreli City" 
"BEFORE THE EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, AMRELI 
Name of Hospital : Civil Amreli Ward No. Bums Bed No. 33 
1. What is your name : Rekhaben Jayrajbhai 
2. Name of father/husband: Jayrajbhai Punjabhai 
3._Your age: 25 
4. Residence/address : Gopalgram Tai. Dhari. 
5. At present where are you?: Civil Hospital
Amreli. 
6. What has happened to you? 
7. How it was happened? All were sleeping in house. An unknown 
person came and he made me woke up from place where I was 
H 
sleeping and he brought me in kitchen and he poured liquid in box
STATE OF GUJARAT v. JAYRAJBHAI PUNJABHAI VARU 
273 
[R.K. AGRAWAL, J.] 
lying in the kitchen on me and unknown person kindled match 
A 
.stick and threw on me and ran away. He. was a male person and 
he was a outsider person. 
8. At what time incident took place? : The incident has taken 
place today in early morning. I don't remember time. 
9. At what place this incident has taken place? : Gopal gram at 
my house. 
10. Who were present at place of incident? : All members of my 
house were sleeping. 
B 
11. Who brought you at clinic/hospital? My mother in law and my 
C 
husband's elder brother etc. brought me. 
12. Whether you have any physical difficulty?: No 
13. If you have to say anything further then say? : I have nothing 
further to say. 
14. The date and time of starting of D.D. 
and 
completion of 0.0. : 8.25 A.M 
8.35 A.M. 
10.3.2003. 
There is no presence of police at the time when above deposition 
is recorded. 
Sd/- illegible 
The patient is conscious and 
D.D. is recorded before me. 
Sd/- Medical Officer, Amreli 8.25 to 8.35 A.M. D.D. recorded in 
my presence. 
Sd/- Thumb impression ofright leg of 
Rekhaben Jayraj as both hands are burnt 
D 
E 
F 
the thumb impression of Right leg of 
G 
Rekhabenistaken. 
Sd/- Executive Magistrate, Amreli." 
7. It is relevant to point out here that in both the statements mentioned 
above, the deceased has not named her husband or his family members. 
Though when a specific question was put to her that what exactly 
H
274 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 
happened on that night, she narrated that on 10.03.2003, at about 5 o'clock 
in the morning, when all other family members were sleeping in the 
house, an unknown person came near her and took her into the kitchen. 
She further narrated that he poured kerosene on her and set her on fire 
and went away from the place. She further gave a statement that the 
unknown person was an outsider who was wearing white clothes.· On 
hearing her cries, other family members also woke up and admitted her 
in the hospital atAmreli. There is no denying the fact that the deceased 
was in her matrimonial home at the time of the incident and all other 
family members were also present in the house at the relevant time. In 
both the dying declarations recorded by two independent witnesses after 
following the due process of law, she gave a statement that the person 
was unknown and there was no involvement of her in-laws or husband. 
Both the statements are consistent and there is no contradiction as to 
the role of the respondent herein. From a perusal of the statements 
made before the Executive Magistrate as well as the police officer, it 
becomes very clear that there was no involvement of the respondent 
herein in the commission of offence. 
8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State placed reliance 
upon the deposition of the father of the deceased who deposed about 
the involvement of respondent herein and
in-laws of the deceased in the 
commission of offence. It is relevant to quote the relevant portion of his 
deposition on the basis of which the Sessions Court convicted the 
respondent herein which is as under:-
"4. On dated I 01h of Fagan month in the early morning a phone 
call came at house of my uncle's son Dilubhai that Rekhaben has 
been burnt, therefore 1 and my uncle's son Dilubhai and 
Manglubhai went atAmreli Civil Hospital. Rekhaben was admitted 
in the hospital and treatment was continued. Rekhaben was burnt 
on whole body. I could not see therefore I went outside. After I 
felt something better I and Dilubhai again went before my 
daughter, Rekhaben and asked her that what this happened so 
Rekhaben told me that I have not done it. Rekhaben told me that 
after giving torture for whole night thereafter she was taken in 
kitchen and after pouring kerosene she was enlightened with match 
stick. Jayrajbhai made Rekhaben woke up and took her in kitchen. 
Rekhaben has not said as to who poured kerosene. Except this 
there were no other persons present there. Rekhaben had not 
asked me anything as to who enlightened match stick. When I
STATE OF GUJARAT v. JAYRAJBHAI PUNJABHAI VARU 
[R.K. AGRAWAL, J.] 
asked Rekhaben she stated that except those people no other 
person was present there. Rekhaben told me that department came 
at that time I stated such that person who enlightened match stick 
had put on white cloth and was unknown person, because accused 
Punjbhai, Jarajbhai, Manuben and Ramjuben had given such threat 
that her only one brother will not be let live, therefore, she has not 
given real fact before department. When Rekhaben had such talk 
with me at that time my uncle's son Dilubhai was present there. 
During the treatment at 2.15 PM in the noon Rekhaben has expired. 
As Rekhaben was burnt therefore she has expired." 
Cross examination by Advocate Shri G.A. Parikh for the accused. 
"6. I and Dilubhai reached at hospital at eight to eight thirty o' 
clock in the morning. It is not true that at Seven O'clock in the 
morning I and Dilubhai reached at Civil Hospital, Amreli. It is true 
that in my statement name ofManglubhai is not written. 
7. When I reached at hospital at that time police already came 
there. I don't know that whether police recorded complaint of 
Rekhaben in my presence or not. It is true that I identified thumb 
impression of Rekhaben on the say of police. That thumb 
impression was of Rekhaben. Mamlatdar went inside to record 
statement. It is true that I identified thumb impression ofRekhaben 
on that statement. When I reached near Rekhaben in the hospital 
at that time
..... was burnt. The glucose bottles were not injected 
to her. She had thirst of water. She could not bend lips. I caused 
her drink water and caused her eat ice cream. It is not true that 
Rekhaben had totally no talk with me." 
9. Learned Sessions Judge, on the basis of the deposition of PW- I, 
convicted the respondent herein for the offence under Section 302 of 
the IPC. PW- I deposed before the court that the deceased informed 
him that after giving her torture for the whole night, she was taken to the 
kitchen by the respondent herein and after pouring kerosene on her; 
matchstick was lighted. He further deposed that except the respondent 
herein, no other person was present at the time of the incident. It was 
further deposed that the respondent herein threatened the deceased of 
dire consequences in case of disclosure of the incident. In a nutshell, 
PW-I deposed about the cruelty and ill behavior meted out to the deceased 
at her matrimonial home. 
I 0. The courts below have to be extremely careful when they deal 
275 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H
276 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 
with a dying declaration as the maker thereof is not available for the 
cross-examination which poses a great difficulty to the accused person. 
A mechanical approach in relying upon a dying declaration just because 
it is there is extremely dangerous. The court has to examine a dying 
declaration scrupulously with a microscopic eye to find out whether the 
dying declaration is voluntary, truthful, made in a conscious state of mind 
and without being influenced by the relatives present or by the investigating 
agency who may be interested in the success of investigation or which 
may be negligent while recording the dying declaration. In the case on 
hand, there are two sets of evidence, one is the statement/declaration 
made before the police officer and the Executive Magistrate and the 
other is the oral dying declaration made by the deceased before her 
father who was examined as PW- I. On a careful scrutiny of the materials 
on record, it cannot be said that there were contradictions in the statements 
made before the police officer and the Executive Magistrate as to the 
role of the respondent herein in the commission of the offence and in 
such circumstances, one set of evidence which is more consistent and 
reliable, which in the present case being one in favour of the respondent 
herein, requires to be accepted and conviction could not be placed on 
the sole testimony of PW-I. A number of times the
relatives influence 
the investigating agency and bring about a dying declaration. The dying 
declarations recorded by the investigating agencies have to be very 
scrupulously examined and the court must remain alive to all the attendant 
circumstances at the time when the dying declaration comes into being. 
ln case of more than one dying declaration, the intrinsic contradictions in 
those dying declarations are extremely important. It cannot be that a 
dying declaration which supports the prosecution alone can be accepted 
while the other innocent dying declarations have to be rejected. Such a 
trend will be extremely dangerous. However, the courts below are fully . 
entitled to act on the dying declarations and make them the basis of 
conviction, where the dying declarations pass.all the above tests. 
11. The court has to weigh all the attendant circumstances and 
come to the independent finding whether the dying declaration was 
properly recorded and whether it was voluntary and truthful. Once the 
court is convinced that the dying declaration is so recorded, it may be 
acted upon and can be made a basis of conviction. The courts must bear 
in mind that each criminal trial is an individual aspect. It may differ from 
the other trials in some or the other respect and, therefore, a mechanical 
approach to the law of dying declaration has to be shunned.
STATE OF GUJARAT v. JAYRAJBHAI PUNJABHAI VARU 
[R.K. AGRAWAL, J.] 
12. On appreciation of evidence on record, we are of the considered 
view that the dying declarations of the deceased recorded by the police 
officer as well as the Executive Magistrate are fully corroborated and 
there is no inconsistency as regards the role of the respondent herein in 
the commission of offence. From a pe'rusal of the statement recorded 
by Bhiku Karsanbhai, P.S.O., the thumb impression ofRekhaben (since 
deceased) which had been identified by her father-Sri Vala Jaskubhai 
Suragbhai as also his cross-examination in which he admitted that police 
had already come there and he had identified her thumb impression and 
Mamlatdar had gone inside to record statement, there is no reason as to 
why Rekhaben would give names of her husband and her in-laws in the 
alleged statement given to her father. A dying declaration is entitled to 
great weight. The conviction basing reliance upon the oral dying 
declaration made to the father of the deceased is not reliable and such a 
declaration can be a result of afterthought. This is the reason the Court 
also insists that the dying declaration should be of such a nature as to 
inspire full confidence of the Court in its correctness. The Court has to 
be on guard that the statement of deceased was not as a result of tutoring, 
prompting or a product ofimagination. The Court must be further satisfied 
that the deceased was in a fit state of mind after a
clear opportunity to 
observe and identify the assailants. Once the Court is satisfied that the 
declaration was true and voluntary, undoubtedly, it can base its conviction 
without any further corroboration. It cannot be laid down as an absolute 
rule of law that the dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of 
conviction unless it is corroborated. The rule requiring corroboration is 
merely a rule of prudence. 
13. The burden of proof in criminal law is beyond all reasonable 
doubt. The prosecution has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all 
reasonable doubt and it is also the rule of justice in criminal law that if 
two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing 
to the guilt of the accused and the other towards his innocence, the view 
which is favourable to the accused should be adopted. 
14. After considering the evidence and the judgments of the courts 
below, we are of the opinion that the evidence available on record and 
the sole evidence of the father of the deceased as compared to the 
dying declaration do not inspire confidence in the mind of this Court to 
make it the basis for the conviction of the respondent-accused. Hence, 
the appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. 
277 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
Nidhi Jain 
Appeal dismissed. 
H