STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to hear the matter under Section 379
of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code,1973 and Article 134 of the Indian
Constitution.

Section 379. Appeal against conviction by High Court in certain cases.

Where the High Court has, on appeal, reversed an order of acquittal of an accused
person and convicted him and sentenced him to death or to imprisonment for life or to
imprisonment for a term of ten years or more, he may appeal to the Supreme Court.

Article 134. Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court in regard to criminal matters.

1. An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgment, final order or
sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court in the territory of India if the High
Court

(a) has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and

sentenced him to death,or
(b) has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any court subordinate to its
authority and has in such trial convicted the accused person and sentenced him
to death; or
(c) Certifies under Article 134A that the case is a fit one for appeal to the
Supreme Court:

Provided that an appeal under sub clause (c) shall lie subject to such provisions as
may be made in that behalf under clause (1) of Article 145 and to such conditions
as the High Court may establish or require.
2. Parliament may by law confer on the Supreme Court any further powers to
entertain and hear appeals from any judgment, final order or sentence in a criminal
proceeding of a High Court in the territory of India subject to such conditions and
limitations as may be specified in such law.
 ISSUES RAISED

A. Whether the accused can be convicted on the basis of dying declaration?

1. Whether there is inconsistency and material discrepancy in the dying

declaration?
 I. Whether the third dying declaration appears to be tutored?

II. Whether the dying declaration is supported by a corroborate evidence?

B.Whether the appellants can be held liable for cruelty and dowry demand?

I. Whether cruelty was inflicted by the appellants?

II. Whether there was dowry demand by the appellants?

C.Whether the circumstantial evidence prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt?

I. Whether the letter is a reliable evidence?

II. Whether the deposition by the deceased’s mother can be relied upon?
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

7
I. Whether the accused can be convicted on the basis of Dying Declaration?

Evidence are soul of any case and that is what makes criminal law to be more interesting.
The case based on mainly 3 sections of the Indian Evidence Act which involves section
32( dying declaration). Section 45 (expert opinion), and Section 113B( presumption as a to
dowry death).

Dying Declaration is a statement made by the victim stating the exact cause of death or as
to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death. It should clearly state
the cause of death. It can be verbal or written. The same dying declaration becomes a deposition
if the dying man makes it on oath to Magistrate. Under the Indian Law, for dying declaration
should be under the shadow of death. If there are more than one dying declaration by the persons
it is necessary that all of them would be same; if declarations states the cause of death differently
than they are not admissible in the court.

According to section 113B lays ground for presumption as to dowry death of women.
This section is directly related to Section 304Bof Indian Penal Code. If all the ground are proved
by the prosecution the Court presumption that the accused is guilty for the offence. Than the
onus of proof shift on the defence, now defence has to prove that the accused is not guilty. If
defence fails to do so conviction is given

. In the case of Ranjit Singh and Ors v. State of Punjab, the Apex court has clearly laid
down that the conviction can be recorded on the basis of the dying declaration alone if the same
is wholly reliable. In the event if there are suspicions as regards to the said dying declaration, the
court should look for some corroborating evidences. Court has further observed that in the event
of inconsistencies in the dying declaration the court should lean towards the first dying
declaration i.e, the dying declaration made by Ritu before the Police Officer.

So in regard to the statement issue no 1 accused cannot be convicted on the basis of dying
declaration because the dying declaration made by the deceased cannot be relied she has made
multiple dying declaration statement. The credibility of dying declaration made by the deceased
is not only doubtful but has no legal legs to stand. Therefore I pray this under court to release the

8
accused on the basis principle of benefit of doubt. No conviction cannot be based on Dying
Declaration because there appears to be no reliable evidence on record to hold that the accused
person.

Punjab v. Parveen Kumar in this case there were three dying declaration the Supreme Court
held none of them reliable as all the declarations were inconsistent with each other as each
version disclosed different role of the accused in the offence. This was the same reason that both
the trial court and the High Court discarded the dying declarations.

I. Whether there is inconsistency and material discrepancy in the dying declaration?

There is inconsistency in the dying declaration and such inconsistency occurred because before,
victim gave three dying declaration to three different persons. The first dying declaration was
given to Head Constable of Police, wherein she stated that she accidentally got the burns at
8.00pm on 14/07/2013 due to a burning candle when she went to check the circuit boy and
because of the rain and wind, nobody got to know about the incident. She also stated that her
friend Yamuna brought her to the Hospital. On the basis of this, an Fir was registered. The
second dying declaration was given to the Executive Magistrate, after getting the fitness
certificate from the Doctor, this was similar to her first statements with the additional detail of
her husband being in the office at that time. According to her third dying declaration was given
to the Executive Magistrate in the presence of Ritu’s parents and brother, wherein she gave a
completely new account of the incident. She stated that as a result of a quarrel, her husband set
her on fire, a neighbor Srijana came and helped. The multiple dying declarations made by Ritu.
The statement which is inconsistent has no value and cannot be considered as evidentiary in
nature.

988 In the case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. P.Khaja Hussain, the Supreme Court has held
that in case of inconsistent dying declaration, such dying declaration should be consistent with
the material facts. In the case of Ram Manorath v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1981, the Supreme
Court observed that a dying declaration that suffers from infirmity cannot form the basis of
conviction.

9
 1.2 Whether the 3rd Dying Declaration appears to be tutored?

Your honors in regard to the statement of issue number 2 it is clear that the
Dying Declaration was appears to be tutored because when the third dying declaration
was taken by magistrate at that time the deseased had been surrounded by her relation
and the deseased had the opportunity of being tutored.

. The same was said in the case of a Malwani women, the victim, Shenaz Dafedar in her dying
declaration had blamed her husband Imran, mother -in-law Nafisa, and sister-in-law Naseem.
However, a special women’s court of AS Shende ruled that the norms were not followed while
recording the dying declaration and that it was necessary for the police to prove that case against
the accused. The court further said that those who deposed in the case were related to the victim
(her father and mother). The victim’s husband told the court that she had set herself on fire when
he was in the bedroom, and that it was him and his brother who had rushed her to hospital. He
also submitted the medical reports to show that soon after the victim was admitted to hospital, he
had fainted, and was treated at the same hospital.

The dying declaration was recorded twice, by tehsildar and by an assistant police inspector.
The court however noted that the victim’s father and brother were present in the room during
both occassions, which are against the rules, as there was always a doubt that the victim was
being tutored. The possibility of tutoring was seen.

Koli Chunilal Savij And Another v. State of Gujarat the third Dying Declaration was recorded
by the Magistrate and as such had sufficient opportunity to be tutored and consequently the
dying declaration, the deceased had been surrounded, by her relations and therefore, it can be
assumed that the deceased had the opportunity of being tutored.

1.3 Whether the Dying declaration is supported corroborated by Evidence?

10
 In regard to the issue number 3 the Dying Declaration is not supported by credible evidence
which bring the charge against the accused person

. In Ram Nath Madhoprasad and Ors v. State of Madhya Pradesh,1953 the Supreme
Court said that, ‘It is settled that it is not safe to convict an accused person merely on the
evidence furnished by dying declaration without further corroboration because such a statement
is not made on oath and is not subject to cross-examination and because the maker of it might be
mentally and physically in a state of confusion and might well be drawing upon imagination
while he was making the declaration. It is in the light that the different dying declaration
declaration made by the deceased and sought to proved in the case have to be considered.

In Kushal Rao v. state of Bombay that case court set the importance rules for dying
declaration and what is right process or manner to record it. In this case, if the dying
statement made by the deceased. That it should be recorded in the form of question answer
from, shall be endorsed/ supported by the doctor that the deceased was in good mental state ,
can be recorded by the person who is legally entitled to record, if there are multiple dying
declaration than it should be consistent, so that the court can rely on it.

The Supreme Court has held that multiple dying declarations can be reliable when
it made without corroboration if consistency is maintain throughout the statement.
Otherwise, the court would have to cross-examine the statements of other witnesses to
determine the truth in a criminal trial.

2. Whether the appellant can be held liable for cruelty and dowry demand?

The appellant cannot be held liable for cruelty and dowry demand because the dying
declaration statement is inconsistence and unreliable and more over the letter written by the
deceased to her mother is concocted and manufactured story implicated the accused in the false
case. There appears to be no reliable evidence on record to hold that the accused used to treat the
deceased Ritu with cruelty so as to bring her conduct within the purview section 498A of the
IPC and even there is no evidence to show that deceased was subjected to cruelty in connection
with demand for Dowry so on before her death.

11
Periasamy v. State ( AIR 2010) where in a Dowry death case deceased was brought to
matrimonial home in a compromise and there was no evidence if she was subjected to any
cruelty or harassment on account of demand thereafter charge of Dowry death could not be said
to have been proved.

This was followed in the case of State of Assam v. Rameshwar Sarma in view of the above
position of law, we find it legally un-tenable the evidence of the above prosecution witnesses on
dow ry demand and payment thereof and we hold that the prosecution failed to prove the
aforesaid charge by adducing sufficient evidence.

2.1 Whether cruelty was inflicted by the appellant?

If we carefully examine the provision of section 304B, we will not that the offence of dowry
death is deemed to have been committed if certain set of conditions are satisfied in a given case.
These conditions are four in number, namely:

1) There is a death of a women caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise
than under normal circumstances,
2) The death of the women has taken place within seven years of her marriage,
3) Soon before her death, the women was subjected to cruelty or harassment or any relative
of her husband,

4) Such cruelty or harassment has been for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry.

All the four conditions stated above are not present in this case. The criminal law dictum that
an accused is presumed to be innocent unless proved that he was not guilty of offence in the
provision of section 498A IPC.

Chemicals and Fibres of India v. Union of India, AIR (1997) SCC558). A demand for money
on account of some financial stringency or for meeting some urgent domestic expenses of for
purchasing manure cannot be termed as a demand for dowry as the said world is normally
understood. The evidence adduced by the oosecution does not, therefore, show that any
demand for dowry as defined in section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was made by the
appellants as what was allegedly asked for was some money for meeting domestic expenses

12
 and for purchasing manure. Since an essential ingredient of section304-B IPC Viz. demand
for dowry is not established, the conviction of the appellants cannot be sustained.

Cruelty was not inflicted by appellant because there appears to be no reliable evidence on record
to hold that the accused used to treat the deceased Ritu with cruelty so as to bring her conduct
within the purview os section 498A of the IPC and even there is no evidence to show that
deceased was subjected to cruelty in connection with demand for Dowry soon before her death.

2.2Whether there was Dowry demand by the appellants?

There appears to be no reliable evidence on record to hold that the accused used to treat
the deceased Ritu with cruelty so as to bring her conduct within the purview section 498A of the
IPC and even there is no evidence to show that deceased was subjected to cruelty in connection
with demand for Dowry soon before her death.

In the case of Kanas Rajv. State of Punjab & Ors.,(2000) 5 SCC 207, it was held that in
case of dowry death the circumstances showing the existence of cruelty or harassment to the
deceased are not restricted to a particular instances but normally refers to a course of conduct.
Such conduct may be spread over a period of time. If the cruelty or harassment or demand of
dowry is shown to have persisted, it shall be deemed to be “soon before death”. Their Lordship
of Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2011) 11 SCC 733,in the case of “ Sanjay Kumar Jain v. State of
Delhi, have held that in order to bring home the guilt under section-B IPC, the prosecution must
prove that victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives. Such
cruelty or harassment was for dowry. Such cruelty or harassment was done within seven years of
marriage. The Lordship have held that as under:- In state of Punjab v. Iqbal Singh, this Court
observed that crimes are generally committed in the privacy of residential homes and in secrecy
and it is difficult to get independent direct evidence in such cases. That is why the Legislature
has, by permitting a presumption to be raised if certain foundational facts are established that the
unfortunate event has taken place within seven years of the marriage

Though there is a letter mentioned above Dowry demand by the appellant but such letter
cannot be reliable document because the said letter was not produce during the course of
investigation and moreover it was not exhibited as a evidence in the court laxman anjali
dhundhale

13
II. Whether the Circumstantial Evidence proved the guilt beyond reasonable doubts?
No circumstances evidence proved the guilt beyond reasonable doubts because the dying
declaration was multiples and according to deceased first and second statement she had
not disclosed anything about the incident to her husband as according to her third
statement deceased husband who was the real culprit or responsible persons .In that set of
fact it was held not reliable so is not factual scenario before us
Sumunt Ojha v. State of Bihar in this case it would appear that as far as husband is
concerned, there is no evidence to show that there was a demand by him or that he had
subjected his wife to cruelty or harassment, whereas the only piece of evidence which has
come on record is doubted for the reasons mentioned in the order is the statements made
by the brother of the deceased lady, that a demand was made by the father-in-law of the
deceased lady just four days prior to the death. If a demand is made for a dowry, it is
expected that the demand would be communicated to the person from whom the dowry
is expected i.e the father or the guardian of the women in question. No such
communication has been made to the father in the present case and event the evidence of
PW11 does not disclose that the demand was communicated to him by his son, it would
also be presumed that once having made a demand, some time would lapse before any
follow up action would be taken by the erring party. It cannot be said that having made a
demand four days prior to the death, the victim would be subjected to cruelty hy her in-
laws.
Therefore, the appellants have wrongly been convicted under section 304-Bof the Indian
Penal Code and also wrongly been convicted under section498-A of IPC.
Laxaman Anjali Dhundhale v. State of Maharastra in this case the accused husband and
in-laws convicted prosecution plea that wife jumped into well due is harassment,
conviction on circumstantial evidence, plea from father of deceased, in-law were
demanding money, medical evidence to show it was a homicidal death, post- mortem
report indicate injuries on chest and abodomen, attrack was with hard and solid thing. No
credible evidence to show involvement of accused. No evidence of planning murder
conviction not sustainable.

3.1Whether the letter was reliable evidence?

14
. Letter written by the Ritu to her Mother Jamini on 17 th of November2012,wherin, deceased
talked about taunts of Avinash Parents and Dowry demand by the foster sister, Lack of support
by Avinash, Life in new rented house and Maritial affairs of Avinash.

If Ritu’s mother would have been told by Ritu that about taunts of Avinash Parents and Dowry
demand by the foster sister, , Lack of support by Avinash, Life in new rented house and Maritial
affairs of Avinash then such fact in ordinary course of things would have been told by her to her
husband i.e., the father of Ritu and would also have been disclosed by her to the police.

Letter was not reliable evidence because the prosecution has not reliable evidence to prove that
letter was written by the deceased Ritu and also there was no evidence on record to hold that the
accused used to treat the deceased with cruelty and Dowry demand.

In the case of Kanas Rajv. State of Punjab & Ors.,(2005) 5 SCC 207, it was held that in case of
dowry death the circumstances showing the existence of cruelty or harassment to the deceased
are not restricted to a particular instances but normally refer to a course of conduct. Such conduct
may be spread over a period of time. If the cruelty or harassment or demand of dowry is shown
to have persisted, it shall be deemed to be soon before death.

In order to bring home the guilt under section 304-B of the Penal Code the following
ingredients are necessary:

1. The victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his

relatives.
2. Such cruelty or harassment was for or in connection with any demand for
dowry.
3. Such cruelty or harassment was done within seven years of the marriage.
In the present case, deceased died within three years of marriage. There was
not reliable evidence which to proved that she was subjected to cruelty and
harassment by her husband and relatives for bringing insufficient dowry.

3.2 Whether the deposition by the deceased mother can be relied upon?

15
In this regard, the deposition by the deceased Mother cannot be relied upon.

Whereas in the case State of Orissa v. Parasuram Naik (7). The accused, the husband was alleged
that he poured petrol on the body of his wife and lit a fire. Whereof extensive burn injuries were
sustained by the deceased wife. It was held that oral dying declaration to her mother can not be
accepted because there was no certificate by medical officer certifying that the deceased was
medically fit to make a statement.

Kaushik Das v. State of Tripural in this case Prosecution unable to prove case. No body named
by deceased mere presumption that she was being harassed by in-laws, it does not lead to
inference that it was accused who commit offence. It is not proper to convict accused only on
preposition the accused was present at place of occurrence, no valid presumption can be made
vide section 304-B, Indian Penal Code. Prosecution failed to prove charge of dowry demand,
harassment to deceased.

In the case of Sudhakar v. State of Madhya Pradesh(20), the Supreme Court while deciding the
issue of multiple dying declaration, which varying from other statements and have no series
related to each other, this will raise a doubt in the eyes of Court to whether the statement should
be belived or not, in order to clear the issue the court has given some directions which help to
guide while exercise the judgment by court in such matters, examine.

Supreme Court of India in concern to multiple dying declaration, it can be considered upon
without corroboration if there is no breakdown of fact in all dying declaration are similar to each
other and state correctly the cause of death, and there is no contradiction between the statement it
can be admissible but if the dying declaration is different from each other and there is a
contradiction between them, then court will cross-examine the facts of the case or can examine
the statements of other witnesses to determine the truth and sanctity of statements regarding the
case.

The statement of the deceased should match the facts and circumstances of the case. It is very
important to understand the character of multiple dying declarations. Points to be considered in
multiple dying declarations:

1. There should be regularity in all the dying declaration.

16
If all the dying declaration does not match or say overlap, then the Court will examine the facts
of the case with the dying declaration or examine the witnesses.

17