STATE OF HARYANA versus MANGE RAM AND ORS.

STATE OF HARYANA versus MANGE RAM AND ORS.

The view of the High Court discarding the testimony of the eye witness and dying declaration was wholly untenable. The trial court rightly convicted the accused for offences under sections 325/34 and 326/34 IPC, as the evidence including the dying declaration and natural witness testimony was credible and reliable. It was not proven beyond reasonable doubt that death was caused by the accused so as to convict them under section 302/34 IPC.

Parties
Appellant: State of Haryana; Respondents: Mange Ram and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Acquittal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court acquittal set aside; convictions under sections 325/34 and 326/34 IPC restored
Legal Topics
Voluntarily Causing Grievous Hurt, Dying Declaration, Natural Witness, Admissibility of Evidence, Section 302 Read With 34 IPC, Section 325/34 IPC, Section 326/34 IPC
Criminal Law Voluntarily Causing Grievous Hurt Dying Declaration Natural Witness Admissibility of Evidence Section 302 Read With 34 IPC Section 325/34 IPC Section 326/34 IPC

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Haryana

Appellant

Mange Ram and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether High Court's acquittal of the accused for causing grievous hurt was tenable
  2. 2 Admissibility of dying declaration where maker was not under shadow of death
  3. 3 Evidentiary value of natural witness

Ratio Decidendi

The view of the High Court discarding the testimony of the eye witness and dying declaration was wholly untenable. The trial court rightly convicted the accused for offences under sections 325/34 and 326/34 IPC, as the evidence including the dying declaration and natural witness testimony was credible and reliable. It was not proven beyond reasonable doubt that death was caused by the accused so as to convict them under section 302/34 IPC.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court acquittal set aside; convictions under sections 325/34 and 326/34 IPC restored

Orders

  • Respondents sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years instead of seven years and five years as directed by Sessions Court
  • Respondents to be taken into custody forthwith to undergo remaining part of sentence