RAJESH alias Rajoo vs State S — 2025 SCMR 1876 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

RAJESH alias Rajoo VS State S. 302(b)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 46---Qatl-i-amd---Re-appraisal of evidence---Dying declaration---Scope---Accused-appellant was charged for committing murder of his wife by setting her on fire due to some domestic quarrel---Record revealed that the main case of the prosecution hinged on the dying declaration given by deceased---In order to do substantial justice, the said dying declaration was played in the Court, however, it was an admitted fact that the said dying declaration was not properly audible---In the instant case it had come on the record that deceased was 38.5% burnt and whether she was able to give a dying declaration in such a situation was again a question to be answered by the prosecution---Moreover, such declaration was neither recorded by the Investigating Officer or the Medical Officer or any other independent person but by the relatives of deceased---Even otherwise the same was, admittedly, not properly audible---On first principle, the sanctity attached to such a statement by the statute should be respected unless there were clear circumstances brought out in the evidence to show that a dying declaration was not reliable---An audio tape or video produced before a Court as evidence ought to be clearly audible or viewable---Video recording of the dying declaration showed the deceased had not made any statement at her own rather she was being dictated and tutored by her relatives to make a statement against the petitioner---Moreover, it was clear that deceased was only saying yes or no in response to the statements made by her relatives present at the relevant time and as such it was not her own statement rather the statement of her relatives which was recorded in the video recording---Thus, the said statement could not be considered as the dying declaration of the deceased---Even otherwise it clearly showed that deceased was under the influence of her relatives who were present at the relevant time and recorded her alleged dying declaration---No certificate of the concerned Medical Officer had been produced in the prosecution evidence to show that the deceased was medically fit to make the statement---None from the hospital staff appeared in the witness box to affirm that any dying declaration was made by the deceased as claimed by the prosecution---Video recording of the dying declaration of deceased was never sent to the office of the Forensic Science Laboratory to determine its genuineness, therefore, it was not safe to rely upon said recording---All these factors when read in conjunction with each other and in juxtaposition would reveal that the instant case was not free from doubts and surmises---Dying declaration was not recorded in accordance with the law; there was no Forensic Science Laboratory Report about the authenticity of the video recording of the dying declaration of the deceased and the dying declaration admittedly not being properly audible could not be relied upon---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

RAJESH alias Rajoo vs State S — 2025 SCMR 1876 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 SCMR