Case Analysis: Jayamma & Anrs v State of Karnataka
![handle is hein.journals/ijlmhs17 and id is 391 raw text is: International Journal of Law Management & Humanities
Case Analysis: Jayamma & Anrs v State of
Karnataka
RUCHI MAHILI
ABSTRACT
The Supreme Court in May 2021, delivered a judgement. The main point of consideration
was, whether a dying declaration can be considered as a sole and non questionable
evidence in a case. This case analysis give a complete outlook of the case and further
explains the reasoning given by the Supreme Court over evidentiary value and
circumstantial importance of dying declaration.
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
Jayamma wife of Riddiniaka is the Appellant and Jayamma (deceased) wife of Ramanaika is
the Respondent. Both the parties had a history of long standing enmity. On 10 September
1988 during an argument between both the parties, Thippeswamynaika the son of deceased
assaulted Riddiniaka (husband of appellant). On 21st September, the appellant family reached
the premises of the responded, confronted them and further demanded Rs 4000 to cover the
medical expenses. The respondent party denied, leading to a headed skirmish which ultimately
lead the appellant party to pour kerosene on Jayamma (deceased respondent), thus further
setting her on fire. The respondent's other son Ravi Kumar and daughter in law Saroja Bai
heard the screams of the respondent and tried to set off the fire while the appellants ran away
from the scene.
The respondent was then taken to the public hospital where she was given primary medical
treatment by Dr A. Thipeswamy. He also administered her certain pain killers. The doctor
further sent a medico-legal case information to Thalak Police Station. On receiving the receipt
there the SHO of Police Station reached hospital and recorded the statement of the respondent
in which she implicated all the appellants. The patient was then sent to the Government hospital
Chitradurga due to severe injuries but succumbed to her injuries on 23rd September 1988.
The case was registered by the police under Sections 504, 307, 114 read with Section 34 of
Indian Penal Code.
The police further sent a requisition to the court requesting to alter the offense under Sec 307
1 Author is a student at Himachal Pradesh University, India.
© 2022. International Journal of Law Management & Humanities [ISSN 2581-5369]
391
[Vol. 5 Iss 3; 391]](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/ijlmhs17&div=32&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Case Analysis: Jayamma & Anrs v State of Karnataka
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most