An emphasis on the nuanced nature of the rule requiring corroboration in criminal cases, particularly in instances where reliance is placed primarily on dying declarations was underscored by the Supreme Court in a recent judgment.

This pivotal decision emerged from a case involving the tragic demise of Shahin Parveen, who succumbed to severe burns sustained under suspicious circumstances.

Shahin Parveen's ordeal began when she was admitted to a hospital with grievous injuries, allegedly inflicted upon her by members of her own family. In her grievous state, she bravely provided a statement implicating her brother-in-law, known as Pappi alias Mashkoor, along with his wife, Naeema, and her brother, Naeem, in the harrowing incident. 

Shahin's statement detailed a harrowing tale of coercion into illicit activities and subsequent physical and sexual assaults, culminating in the horrific act of being doused in kerosene and set ablaze.

Following Shahin's tragic demise, the legal proceedings ensued, with the accused facing charges under Sections 302 (murder) and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. 

The trial court, upon careful deliberation, found the accused guilty and handed down a sentence of life imprisonment, a decision subsequently upheld by the Allahabad High Court.

However, the case took a significant turn when it reached the Supreme Court. A bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta scrutinized the pivotal aspect of the dying declaration made by Shahin.

Drawing upon legal precedents, particularly the case of Atbir v. Government of NCT of Delhi, the apex court delineated the critical factors to consider when relying on such declarations for convictions.

Central to the Supreme Court's deliberation was the determination of Shahin's mental state at the time of making her statement, ensuring it remained untainted by external influences such as coaching or coercion. Satisfied with the integrity and coherence of Shahin's declaration, the bench reiterated the principle that a dying declaration could serve as the sole basis for conviction if it instills unwavering confidence in the court.

In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court endorsed Shahin's dying declaration as a credible and compelling piece of evidence, particularly in implicating Pappi in the ghastly crime. However, recognizing the absence of specific roles attributed to Naeema and Naeem, the court extended the benefit of doubt to them, acquitting them of the charges.

In light of these deliberations, the apex court ultimately allowed the appeal, effectively overturning the lower courts' verdicts and reshaping the contours of jurisprudence surrounding dying declarations. 

Case: Naeem v. State of Uttar Pradesh,

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1978 OF 2022.

Click to read/download Judgment.