May 164 min read

A Dying Declaration Speaks: Supreme Court Affirms Conviction in Rajendra Kolhe Case

Updated: Jul 9

Summary of the Judgment

Case Name: Rajendra S/O Ramdas Kolhe vs. State of Maharashtra
Date: 15th May 2024
Judges: Honorable Justice Abhay S. Oka and Honorable Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Acts and Sections: Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 307, 498A, 342, 323, and 504 read with Section 34 IPC Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Cited Judgements: Khushal Rao vs. State of Bombay Paniben (Smt.) vs. State of Gujarat Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam vs. State of Andhra Pradesh Sher Singh vs. State of Punjab Sudhakar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Amol Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Lakhan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, Ashabai vs. State of Maharashtra
Original Judgment

Introduction

The recent Supreme Court of India judgement in the case of Rajendra S/O Ramdas Kolhe vs. State of Maharashtra has brought to light crucial aspects of criminal jurisprudence, specifically regarding the admissibility and reliability of dying declarations. This case, adjudicated by Honorable Justice Abhay S. Oka and Honorable Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, underscores the complexities and challenges inherent in criminal trials where the primary evidence consists of statements made by the deceased. Dying declarations hold a unique place in the Indian legal system, often being pivotal in determining the outcome of cases involving serious offences like murder.

This article aims to provide an in-depth analysis of the judgement, exploring the legal principles applied by the Supreme Court, the scrutiny of evidence presented, and the implications for future cases. By examining the procedural history, the key evidence and testimonies, and the judicial reasoning, this analysis seeks to offer legal professionals a comprehensive understanding of how dying declarations are evaluated and the standards upheld by the judiciary to ensure justice is served.

Analysis of the Judgement

The Supreme Court of India's recent judgement in the case of Rajendra S/O Ramdas Kolhe vs. State of Maharashtra presents a significant legal discourse on the acceptance and reliability of dying declarations in criminal jurisprudence. This case, adjudicated by Honorable Justice Abhay S. Oka and Honorable Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, highlights the complexities involved in assessing evidence, particularly when it pertains to dying declarations.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Rajendra S/O Ramdas Kolhe, was convicted by the trial court for the murder of his wife, Rekha, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The conviction was based on the dying declarations made by the deceased, Rekha, implicating her husband and brother-in-law, Suresh. Rekha, a police constable, sustained severe burn injuries allegedly inflicted by her husband and brother-in-law, leading to her death. The prosecution's case was primarily built on her dying declarations and the corroborative testimonies of witnesses.

Procedural History

The trial court convicted Rajendra and sentenced him to life imprisonment, which was upheld by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. The appellant's appeal to the Supreme Court was rooted in challenging the reliability of the dying declarations and alleging inconsistencies in the prosecution witnesses' testimonies.

Key Evidence and Testimonies

Dying Declarations (Ex. 59 and Ex. 65):

The trial and High Court heavily relied on Ex. 59, the dying declaration recorded by Assistant Sub-Inspector Dake (PW-6), where Rekha detailed the assault and burning by her husband and brother-in-law.
The declaration was corroborated by medical officer Dr. Kiran Kurkure (PW-13), who affirmed Rekha's ability to give a statement despite 99% burns.
Ex. 65, another dying declaration, was not accepted by the High Court due to procedural discrepancies. Witness Testimonies:

Various witnesses, including Rekha’s mother (PW-3), brother (PW-4), and police constables (PW-2, PW-7, PW-8), supported the prosecution's narrative of ongoing domestic violence and the events leading to Rekha's death.
Contradictions in the testimonies were highlighted by the defense, arguing the lack of consistency and potential tutoring of witnesses.

Legal Analysis

The Supreme Court's judgement reaffirms the principles governing the admissibility and reliability of dying declarations under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This section allows statements made by a deceased person regarding the cause of their death to be admissible as evidence.

Key Judicial Pronouncements Referenced:

Khushal Rao vs. State of Bombay: Established that a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if it is found to be truthful and voluntary.
Paniben (Smt.) vs. State of Gujarat: Reiterated that dying declarations should be scrutinized carefully to ensure they are not influenced by tutoring or imagination.
Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam vs. State of Andhra Pradesh: Emphasized the intrinsic value of truthfulness in dying declarations, given their solemn nature.
Sher Singh vs. State of Punjab: Noted the special sanctity of dying declarations due to the declarant's awareness of impending death.
Sudhakar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh: Highlighted the importance of corroborative evidence supporting the dying declaration.
Amol Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh: Clarified that the reliability of dying declarations is paramount, even if multiple declarations exist.
Lakhan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ashabai vs. State of Maharashtra: Discussed the evaluation of multiple dying declarations, stressing the importance of consistency and reliability.

The Supreme Court's Decision

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellant, asserting the credibility and reliability of Rekha's dying declaration (Ex. 59). The judgement meticulously analyzed the evidence, addressing the contradictions and improvements in witness testimonies. The Court emphasized that minor inconsistencies do not undermine the overall reliability of a dying declaration, especially when corroborated by medical evidence and the immediate recording of the statement.

Significant Observations:

The Court noted that the dying declaration (Ex. 59) was recorded promptly, and the medical officer certified Rekha's capacity to give a statement, thereby lending it significant weight.
The improvements in witness testimonies were considered natural, given the passage of time between the incident and the court proceedings.
The law on dying declarations, as elaborated in previous judgements, was reaffirmed, underscoring the conditions under which such declarations can be the sole basis for conviction.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's decision in Rajendra S/O Ramdas Kolhe vs. State of Maharashtra underscores the critical role of dying declarations in the criminal justice system. This judgement reinforces the legal standards for evaluating such declarations, ensuring they are voluntary, consistent, and free from external influences. The Court's rigorous scrutiny of evidence and adherence to legal principles serve as a guiding framework for future cases involving dying declarations.

This case reaffirms the judiciary's commitment to delivering justice based on reliable and credible evidence, even in the face of procedural and testimonial challenges. The judgement not only provides clarity on the admissibility of dying declarations but also strengthens the jurisprudence on this vital aspect of criminal law.