A) ABSTRACT / HEADNOTE

The case Rajendra S/o Ramdas Kolhe v. State of Maharashtra revolves around the admissibility and reliability of a dying declaration as the sole evidence leading to conviction. The appellant was convicted under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for setting his wife, a police constable, ablaze along with his brother-in-law. The dying declaration (Ex. 59), corroborated by medical testimony and evidence from witnesses, served as the foundation of the conviction. The Supreme Court analyzed its validity, finding it credible, voluntary, and free from tutoring. The judgment reaffirmed that a trustworthy dying declaration could be the sole basis for conviction without corroboration, provided it inspires judicial confidence.

Keywords: Dying declaration, Evidence Act Section 32(1), Credibility, Section 302 IPC, Sole basis of conviction.

B) CASE DETAILS

i) Judgment Cause Title: Rajendra S/o Ramdas Kolhe v. State of Maharashtra
ii) Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 2281 of 2011
iii) Judgment Date: 15 May 2024
iv) Court: Supreme Court of India
v) Quorum: Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.
vi) Author: Ujjal Bhuyan, J.
vii) Citation: [2024] 6 S.C.R. 740
viii) Legal Provisions Involved: Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act, Sections 302, 34 of IPC
ix) Judgments Overruled by the Case: None
x) Case Related to Which Law Subjects: Criminal Law, Law of Evidence

C) INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF JUDGMENT

The case stems from an incident where Rekha, wife of the appellant Rajendra Kolhe, was severely burned following alleged domestic violence and was subjected to multiple physical abuses before being set on fire. The prosecution relied on Rekha’s dying declaration and witness testimonies. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC, and the High Court upheld the conviction. The Supreme Court addressed the appellant’s challenge to the reliance on the dying declaration as the sole basis for conviction.

D) FACTS OF THE CASE

Rekha was a police constable residing in Ambajogai, Maharashtra, along with her husband, appellant Rajendra Kolhe, and her in-laws. On 22 July 2002, she sustained burn injuries allegedly inflicted by her husband and brother-in-law Suresh. According to the dying declaration:

• Rekha’s hands and legs were tied by her husband and brother-in-law.
• Kerosene was poured on her body, and she was set ablaze.
• Neighbors rescued her and extinguished the fire.
• She was taken to the hospital, where her dying declaration was recorded.

Rekha’s statement implicated her husband and brother-in-law, supported by medical evidence and testimonies of neighbors and family members. She succumbed to her injuries on 24 July 2002. The defense argued it was a case of suicide, and inconsistencies in witness testimonies were highlighted.

E) LEGAL ISSUES RAISED

i) Whether the dying declaration (Ex. 59) of the deceased Rekha was credible and valid evidence to support conviction.
ii) Can a dying declaration be the sole basis for conviction under Section 302 IPC without corroboration?

F) PETITIONER/APPELLANT’S ARGUMENTS

i) The appellant argued there were material contradictions in the evidence presented by prosecution witnesses.
ii) The time inconsistencies in the dying declaration (Ex. 59) recorded by the doctor and police officer raised doubts about its credibility.
iii) The theory of domestic violence was contested, as there was no motive for the appellant to kill his wife.
iv) It was claimed that the appellant attempted to save the deceased and sustained burn injuries himself.

G) RESPONDENT’S ARGUMENTS

i) The respondent asserted that the dying declaration (Ex. 59) was voluntary, credible, and consistent.
ii) Witness testimonies, although slightly inconsistent, corroborated the core narrative of Rekha’s dying declaration.
iii) Medical evidence confirmed the deceased was in a fit state to make the statement.
iv) The cumulative evidence proved the appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

H) JUDGMENT

a. Ratio Decidendi

i) The Court emphasized that a credible dying declaration could be the sole basis for conviction if it is consistent, voluntary, and inspires confidence.
ii) Minor inconsistencies in testimonies were considered natural due to the lapse of time and did not dilute the core facts.
iii) The Court upheld the dying declaration (Ex. 59) as valid, finding it free from tutoring and corroborated by medical evidence.

b. Obiter Dicta

i) The Court noted that identical statements from witnesses could indicate tutoring, highlighting the importance of natural variations in human recollection.

c. Guidelines

i) A dying declaration must meet three conditions to be the sole basis for conviction:

• Voluntariness
• Consistency
• Absence of tutoring
  ii) Statements recorded contemporaneously and corroborated by medical evidence hold greater credibility.

I) CONCLUSION & COMMENTS

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and directed the appellant to surrender. This judgment reaffirms the principle that a truthful and voluntary dying declaration is sacrosanct evidence in criminal trials. However, courts must rigorously evaluate such declarations for reliability and consistency.

J) REFERENCES

a. Important Cases Referred

i) Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay, [1958] 1 SCR 552
ii) Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam v. State of Andhra Pradesh, [1993] 2 SCR 666
iii) Sudhakar v. State of Madhya Pradesh, [2012] 7 SCR 128
iv) Lakhan v. State of Madhya Pradesh, [2010] 9 SCR 705

b. Important Statutes Referred

i) Section 32(1), Evidence Act, 1872
ii) Section 302, IPC
iii) Section 34, IPC