in ,

MP High Court set aside conviction u/s 302 IPC where dying declaration is recorded by IO.

MP HC
Share
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Appeals under Section 374 of Cr.P.C was filed in  MP High Court before Hon’ble Shri Justice Vive Rusia  and Hon’ble Justice Shailendra Shukla.

Law laid down in this case:

Recording of Dying Declaration by Investigating Officers- Held- Regulation No.742 of M.P. Police Regulation stipulating assessment of condition of injured by Medical Officer before recording such dying declaration needs to be adhered to. Further, it should also be explained as to why the service of Magistrate could not be requisitioned for recording of dying declaration.

Case involves allegations of committing triple murder-

Role of Investigating Officer found to be extremely unprofessional, with not only major lapses but also indications of actual concocted dying declaration – Initiation of proceedings under MP Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1976 recommended against Investigating Officer.

The Apex Court in the case of Munna Raja & Anr. vs. State of M.P. AIR 1976 S.C. 2190 has held that where the Investigating Officer himself recorded the statement of the victim who was in a precarious condition if services of the Magistrate or doctor were not sought, such a practice of recording by the Investigating Officer was improper and should not be encouraged.

In Meera vs. State of Rajasthan, AIR 2004 S.C. 1879 it was laid down that where the Investigating Officer had plenty of time and facility to procure the services of the Magistrate for recording of a dying declaration, the dying declaration recorded by the Magistrate should be excluded from consideration.

Court expressed regret on inappropriate appreciation of the evidence by the trial Court, which although noticed serious discrepancies in the evidence, has however tried to reason out in favour of the prosecution which has resulted in failure of justice ultimately.

Also Read  Jharkhand High court set aside the Seven (7) yrs conviction order under 395/ 397 of IPC and Arms Act as factum of dacoity was not proved