Dying Declarations Amid Crowd Without Medical Certificate Unreliable, Arson Murder Acquittal Upheld: Supreme Court in Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar [2026 INSC 223]

In Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar & Ors. (2026 INSC 223), the Supreme Court dismissed the elder son's appeal against the acquittal of his younger brother and sister-in-law for the death of their parents in a fire, holding that the written and oral dying declarations were not credible, the motive stood demolished by the elder son's own admission, and the investigation was grossly deficient (paras 17–18, 22, 26, 28, 31, 33). The Court restated the law on dying declarations and stressed that all incriminating circumstances must be put to the accused under Section 313 CrPC (paras 13–14, 30–31). A Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K. Vinod Chandran delivered the judgment.

Status: High Court's acquittal of the accused affirmed; Criminal Appeal by the elder son of the deceased dismissed (paras 32–33).

Headnote: Reliability of Dying Declarations

Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32 – Dying declaration – Multiple written and oral declarations – Recording in presence of villagers and relatives – Absence of medical certification – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 313 – Incriminating circumstances not put to accused – Murder by arson – Appeal against acquittal – Defective investigation.

Held: (i) A dying declaration can by itself found a conviction if it inspires confidence and is free from prompting, tutoring or imagination; fitness need not necessarily be certified by a doctor, but if there is an iota of suspicion the Court must look for corroboration (paras 13–14).

(ii) Where burns are extensive, a declaration in question-and-answer form lends more credence than a long narrative that could be supplied by interested relatives; it should ideally be recorded in the presence of a doctor and not before numerous bystanders (para 14).

(iii) The First Information Statement, recorded from a grievously burnt victim while villagers and relatives stood around, without medical certification and containing a long history of the family dispute, did not inspire confidence as a dying declaration (paras 16–17).

(iv) The second declaration recorded by the BDO was also disbelieved: it was read over to the persons present, the BDO's and IO's versions on who wrote it conflicted, and no certification of fitness was taken though a doctor was attending (para 18).

(v) Oral dying declarations to interested and related witnesses were not credible, the lady whose shouts first raised the alarm was never examined, and the motive collapsed when the elder son admitted he was willing to give his brother a 50% share (paras 21–22, 26).

(vi) None of the incriminating circumstances was put to the accused under Section 313 CrPC; remand was unnecessary as the evidence fell short of proof beyond reasonable doubt (paras 29–30).

(paras 13–33)

Case Details: Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar (2026 INSC 223)

Final Outcome: Criminal Appeal dismissed; acquittal of the accused son and daughter-in-law by the High Court affirmed.

Case: Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar & Ors.

Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 223

Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. ___ of 2026 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 15378 of 2024)

Court: Supreme Court of India (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) – Reportable

Date of Decision: 11 March 2026

Bench: Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K. Vinod Chandran (author)

Relevant Acts & Sections: Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 32; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sections 161 and 313

Impugned Order: Judgment of the High Court reversing the Trial Court's conviction and acquitting the accused (paras 3, 8)

Counsel: Mr. Smarhar Singh, Advocate-on-Record, for the appellant; Mr. Amanullah for the State; Mr. Vipin Sanghi, Senior Counsel, for the accused (paras 4–6)

Source: Supreme Court of India

Key Holdings of the Supreme Court

• The law on dying declarations laid down by the Constitution Bench in Laxman v. State of Maharashtra and later decisions was summarised in detail (paras 7–14).
• The FIS and the BDO's recorded statement, both taken amid villagers and relatives and without medical certification, did not inspire confidence (paras 17–18).
• Inconsistency in narration alone does not discard oral dying declarations, but here they were not credible or even probable given the grievous burns and interested witnesses (paras 21–22).
• A pathologist cannot certify, by looking at a post-mortem report, that the deceased was fit to make a dying declaration (para 23).
• Partially burnt complaints produced by the appellant, not seized or handed to the IO, could not be relied upon (paras 24–25).
• The investigation was a sham; the prosecution rested on motive alone, and that motive was demolished (paras 22, 28).

Brief Facts of the Case

In the early hours of 23.11.2016, a thatched house in which an elderly lawyer and his wife lived was gutted in a fire. The husband died on the spot and the wife died two days later in hospital. The prosecution alleged that their younger son (A1) and his wife (A2), due to enmity over land, set the house on fire to kill them (paras 3, 24).

The defence alleged that a neighbour managing the deceased's properties and the elder son had colluded, and alternatively that the fire was accidental, caused by a cooking gas cylinder bursting (para 3). The Trial Court convicted the accused; the High Court acquitted them. The elder son of the deceased appealed (paras 3–4).

The prosecution relied on the FIS recorded by PW7 at the hospital, a statement recorded by the BDO (PW8), oral dying declarations spoken of by PWs 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6, the medical evidence and motive (paras 4, 15–20).

Issues Before the Supreme Court

1. Whether the written and oral dying declarations were reliable enough to sustain a conviction (paras 15–23).
2. Whether motive and the documents produced to prove enmity were established (paras 22, 24–26).
3. Whether the defects in investigation and in the Section 313 CrPC examination warranted affirming the acquittal or remand (paras 28–31).

Court's Findings and Reasoning

Principles on dying declarations (paras 7–14): Reviewing Laxman, Sher Singh, Atbir, Bhajju, Ashabai, Satish Chandra, Amol Singh and Lakhan, the Court held that a dying declaration may be oral or written, single or multiple, and need not be medically certified if the Court is otherwise satisfied of fitness; but suspicion calls for corroboration, and a declaration recorded by a Judicial Magistrate, in the presence of a doctor and away from bystanders, adds credence.

The FIS (paras 15–17): Though the police reached the scene while the fire raged, no statement was recorded there, and the FIR was registered only at 9.00 am. The FIS was taken at the hospital with villagers and relatives around, without medical certification, and narrated a long family history improbable from a seriously burnt woman who was presumably asleep at the time.

The BDO's statement (para 18): PW7 said the declaration was in his handwriting and signed by the BDO, while the BDO said he wrote it himself. Villagers and relatives were present, the statement was read over to them, and no medical certification was obtained though a doctor was attending.

Oral declarations and missing witness (paras 19–22): The witnesses who reached later all spoke of a lady's shouts waking them, but she was never examined, which was a very serious lacuna. The witnesses were related or allegedly interested, and PW6's admission that he was willing to give his brother a 50% share demolished the projected motive.

Medical evidence (para 23): The 60% burns figure was stated for the first time in Court, the injuries were not confined to the lower body, and the pathologist's opinion on fitness drawn from the post-mortem report deserved no credence.

Investigation lapses (paras 24–28, 31): No scene mahazar was drawn, no forensic examination of the cause of fire was made despite the gas-cylinder defence, independent witnesses were not examined, the arrest memo was missing and the accused's presence in the village was not established.

Section 313 examination (paras 29–30): Only four questions were put, and none of the incriminating circumstances was put to the accused. Referring to its decision in Sanjay Kumar v. State of Bihar (Criminal Appeal No. 860 of 2026), the Court declined to remand, as the evidence fell far short of the "must be true" standard stated in Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab.

Final Outcome and Directions

• The High Court's acquittal of the accused was affirmed (para 32).
• The appeal was dismissed; pending applications disposed of (paras 33–34).
• The Court cautioned investigators and courts to follow accepted practices and procedural rules to the hilt where lives are lost and false accusations are possible (para 32).

Legal Principle Laid Down

A dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction only if it inspires confidence as to its truthfulness and the declarant's fitness. Where it is recorded amid relatives and villagers, without medical certification, and contains details improbable from a grievously injured person, it must be discarded unless corroborated. The FIS should not be given the status of a dying declaration in such circumstances. All incriminating circumstances must be put to the accused under Section 313 CrPC, a duty shared by the Court and the Prosecutor (paras 13–14, 17–18, 31).

Precedents Relied Upon

• Laxman v. State of Maharashtra, (2002) 6 SCC 710 – Relied upon – Constitution Bench on medical certification of fitness for dying declarations. Discussed at paras 7–8.
• Sher Singh v. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 265 – Referred to – multiple dying declarations in bride-burning case. Discussed at para 9.
• Atbir v. Government of NCT of Delhi, (2010) 9 SCC 1 – Referred to – principles on dying declaration as sole basis of conviction. Discussed at para 10.
• Bhajju @ Karan Singh v. State of M.P., (2012) 4 SCC 327; Ashabai v. State of Maharashtra, (2013) 2 SCC 224; Satish Chandra v. State of M.P., (2014) 6 SCC 723 – Referred to – appraisal of multiple and narrative dying declarations. Discussed at paras 11–12.
• Amol Singh v. State of M.P., (2008) 5 SCC 468 and Lakhan v. State of M.P., (2010) 8 SCC 514 – Referred to – reliability, not plurality, of declarations matters. Discussed at para 12.
• Sanjay Kumar & Anr. v. State of Bihar & Ors., Criminal Appeal No. 860 of 2026, decided on 12.02.2026 – Referred to – casual Section 313 examination; citing Ashok v. State of U.P. and Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra. Discussed at para 30.
• Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1957 SC 637 – Relied upon – distance between "may be true" and "must be true". Discussed at para 30.

Important Paragraphs of the Judgment

Verbatim extracts from the judgment. For the full text, refer to the judgment PDF below.

Para 2: "Overzealous investigation is as fatal to prosecution as are the lethargic and the tardy."

Para 13: "That, the capacity of the injured to make the statement, both physical and mental, need not be necessarily certified by a doctor and would rest again on the satisfaction of the Court on an analysis of the testimony of the various witnesses and the other evidence coming forth in trial."

Para 14: "That, as far as possible, the recording is to be done in the presence of the Doctor and definitely not in the presence of numerous bystanders; which could lead to a defence being raised of prompting and tutoring."

Para 17: "The FIS has a long narrative of the history of the family dispute, highly improbable from a lady burned seriously."

Para 21: "The non examination of the crucial witness, spoken of by the witnesses who reached the place later, on hearing her shouts, is a very serious lacuna in prosecution."

Para 31: "The incriminating circumstances that come out in a trial are to be put to the accused in its entirety, a solemn duty enjoined both on the Court and the Prosecutor equally, failing which the entire prosecution may fail for that sole reason."

Practical Impact of the Ruling

• For investigators: Dying declarations should be recorded with a doctor present and certifying fitness, away from relatives and bystanders; scene mahazars and forensic examination of the cause of fire are essential (paras 14, 24, 31).
• For prosecutors: The first independent witnesses must be examined, and the Prosecutor shares the duty of ensuring every incriminating circumstance is put to the accused under Section 313 (paras 21, 28, 30–31).
• For trial courts: A casual Section 313 examination can cause the entire prosecution to fail (paras 29–31).
• For appellants against acquittal: An acquittal fortifies the presumption of innocence, and documents not seized or produced in the manner required in a criminal trial cannot prove motive (paras 3, 25).

FAQs on Reliability of Dying Declarations

1. What did the Supreme Court decide in Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar?

It dismissed the elder son's appeal and affirmed the High Court's acquittal of his brother and sister-in-law for the death of their parents in a fire (paras 32–33).

2. Must a doctor certify fitness before a dying declaration is relied on?

Not necessarily; the Court may be satisfied from other evidence. But medical certification always aids satisfaction, and suspicion calls for corroboration (paras 13–14).

3. Why were the dying declarations rejected here?

They were recorded amid villagers and relatives without medical certification, contained an improbable long narrative, involved conflicting accounts of who wrote them, and came through interested witnesses (paras 17–18, 21–22).

4. Can a pathologist certify fitness from the post-mortem report?

No. The Court found no credence in such an opinion, as fitness cannot be discerned merely by looking at the post-mortem report (para 23).

5. Why was the case not remanded for a fresh Section 313 examination?

Because the evidence itself fell short of proof beyond reasonable doubt, so remand was not warranted (para 30).

Keywords: 2026 INSC 223, Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar, dying declaration, Section 32 Evidence Act, medical certification of fitness, First Information Statement, multiple dying declarations, oral dying declaration, Section 313 CrPC, appeal against acquittal, arson murder, defective investigation, Laxman v. State of Maharashtra, Atbir, Justice K. Vinod Chandran, Justice Sanjay Kumar, Supreme Court judgment

Related on LegalTaxGuru

• More Supreme Court Reportable judgments
• Civil/Criminal articles

Download Judgment PDF – Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar

Judgment PDF: 2026 INSC 223 – Sanjay Kumar Sharma v. State of Bihar & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. ___ of 2026, arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 15378 of 2024) – Download Judgment PDF

Source: Supreme Court of India (official website).