Dying Declaration Supreme Court Judgment India 2026 | Sanjay Kumar Sharma v State of Bihar Case

Case Summary

• Case: Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar & Ors.

• Citation: 2026 INSC 223

• Date of Judgment: 11 March 2026

• Bench: Honourable Justice Sanjay Kumar; Honourable Justice K. Vinod Chandran

• Key Statutes: Indian Evidence Act, Section 32 (Dying Declarations); Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 313 (Examination of Accused)

Introduction

The Supreme Court in Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar & Ors. confronted a tragic parricide allegation where the Trial Court convicted the son and daughter-in-law for setting ablaze the parents’ thatched home; the High Court later acquitted them, and the appeal reached the apex. The plurality of issues that the Bench had to evaluate included the nature and reliability of multiple dying declarations, the quality of investigation, the adequacy of recordation under Section 313 CrPC, and the proper application of established principles governing reliance on dying declarations.

Factual Matrix and Procedural Posture

On 23 November 2016, a thatched shanty housing an elderly lawyer and his wife was gutted by fire. The husband died on the spot; the wife succumbed subsequently in the hospital. The prosecution alleged motive arising from property disputes between the deceased and their younger son and his wife; the accused were convicted at trial but acquitted by the High Court on the ground of reasonable doubt. The appeal required the Court to reassess both the evidentiary value of the dying declarations and the fairness and adequacy of the investigation and trial process.

Core Legal Issues Considered

1. The evidentiary value of dying declarations: The Court reiterated that a dying declaration under Section 32 of the Evidence Act may form the sole basis for conviction if it inspires full confidence. However, such statements require scrutiny for tutoring, prompting, or coercion. Mental and physical capacity of the declarant may be derived from circumstances even without medical certification.

2. The investigation and scene inquiry: The Bench was sharply critical of investigative omissions, including the absence of a scene mahazar, no forensic examination to determine if the fire was accidental or homicidal, and delayed registration of the FIR.

3. Examination under Section 313 CrPC: The Court noted that the Trial Court framed only perfunctory questions. It reminded trial judges of their duty to ensure comprehensive questioning so the accused can explain incriminating evidence.

Analysis of the Court’s Reasoning

The judgment strikes a balanced note. While acknowledging the potential potency of dying declarations, the Court refused to treat the label dying declaration as a talismanic endorsement of truth where surrounding circumstances suggest otherwise.

Two strands of reasoning determined the outcome: first, the forensic and procedural defects in the investigation; second, the provenance and reliability of the dying statements themselves. The First Information Statement (FIS) attributed to one of the victims was unusually detailed, given her grievous burns, making it suspect. A subsequent statement attributed to the Block Development Officer (BDO) lacked safeguards, such as the presence of multiple bystanders and the absence of contemporaneous medical certification.

The Court also examined oral dying declarations related by witnesses. While material consistency is required, the testimony evidenced close family relationships, and several independent witnesses were not examined. The trial record, therefore, suffered both from systemic investigative negligence and from a selective, interest-laden choice of witnesses.

Key Judicial Dicta

• "Overzealous investigation is as fatal to prosecution as are the lethargic and the tardy."

• "The investigation, according to us, was a sham and was premeditated, throwing to the winds every tenet of criminal jurisprudence informed by due procedure."

• "If there is an iota of suspicion, the Court has to look for corroboration."

Practical Implications for Practitioners

• Investigating Officers: Scene preservation, timely FIR registration, forensic examination, and seizure mahazars are mandatory. In fire cases, investigators must rule out accidental causes like gas cylinder leaks.

• Prosecutors: Public prosecutors must assist courts in formulating detailed Section 313 questions. A casual approach risks reversal.

• Trial Judges: Statements should be recorded in the presence of medical personnel whenever possible, and the declarant's state of mind must be thoroughly explored in evidence.

• Defence Practitioners: Effective lines of defence include challenging the provenance of dying declarations and highlighting investigative gaps.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s acquittal. The decision does not diminish the intrinsic legal value of dying declarations but illustrates that labels carry weight only when the procedural and factual substratum justifies confidence. For legal practitioners and investigators, the case provides salutary guidance: sound procedure, rigorous forensics, careful recording of statements, and comprehensive Section 313 questioning are indispensable to securing convictions.

Judicial Observations on Dying Declarations and Investigation

From a conspectus of the above decisions, it is clear that a dying declaration is a very important species of evidence capable of proving the crime proper and identifying the accused, an exception to hearsay having been provided by Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act. That, a dying declaration, for reliance should inspire confidence in the Court as to its credibility. The Court should be satisfied it is made by the deceased without any prompting, tutoring, or coercion. That, then, conviction can be based solely on the dying declaration, and there is no requirement of any corroboration.

The capacity of the injured to make the statement, both physical and mental, need not be necessarily certified by a doctor and would rest on the satisfaction of the Court on an analysis of the testimony of the various witnesses. That, if the Court is satisfied of the fit state of mind of the injured from the evidence on record, a contrary medical opinion or an absence of it will be inconsequential. The decisions also caution us that if the statement is doubtful, then the dying declaration could be eschewed completely, based on the facts of each case.

We cannot help but notice that in the present case, there is a plethora of dying declarations, which we will examine one by one. There are two dying declarations reduced to writing and quite a few oral ones. The FIS itself was recorded by PW7, PSI of the jurisdictional Police Station, in the presence of PW1. Neither is there evidence of a diary entry made in the police station, nor is there a phone call to the SHO, nor is the SHO examined to speak on the phone call received. Strangely, despite the SHO and the PSI having reached the scene, there is no FIS recorded from any of the persons who were at the spot. PW7 deposed that he went to the hospital after carrying out the inquest of Sarangdhar Singh, where the FIS was recorded as the statement of the injured victim, Kamla Devi. The FIR narrates the details of her family, the enmity with the younger son, and the crime.