UTTAM versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

UTTAM versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

The Court held that because the High Court had rightly discarded the two written dying declarations due to several procedural infirmities, it was unsafe to convict the appellant solely on the basis of oral dying declarations made to interested witnesses (PW-2 and PW-12) whose testimonies contradicted the written...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Uttam; Respondent: The State of Maharashtra
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal No. 485 of 2012 / Appeal to Supreme Court From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgments of the trial court and High Court quashed; appellant acquitted and set at liberty if not required in connection with any other case.
Legal Topics
Dying Declaration, Section 32 Indian Evidence Act, Section 302 IPC, Admissibility of Evidence, Corroboration, Magistrate Recorded Statements
Evidence Criminal Law Procedure Dying Declaration Section 32 Indian Evidence Act Section 302 IPC Admissibility of Evidence Corroboration +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Uttam

Appellant

The State of Maharashtra

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal No. 485 of 2012 / Appeal to Supreme Court From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility and evidentiary value of multiple dying declarations
  2. 2 Whether written dying declarations recorded by police/Magistrate were reliable
  3. 3 Whether oral dying declarations made to interested witnesses can justify conviction when written declarations discarded

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that because the High Court had rightly discarded the two written dying declarations due to several procedural infirmities, it was unsafe to convict the appellant solely on the basis of oral dying declarations made to interested witnesses (PW-2 and PW-12) whose testimonies contradicted the written statements and were not recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.; prosecution failed to lead trustworthy corroborative evidence, and therefore the appellant was entitled to benefit of doubt and acquitted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgments of the trial court and High Court quashed; appellant acquitted and set at liberty if not required in connection with any other case.

Orders

  • The judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Court, Nagpur dated 29.04.1997 are quashed and set aside.
  • The judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench dated 26.07.2010 are quashed and set aside.