In this landmark ruling, the Supreme Court has stated that when an appeal is made for a conviction, the High Courts have to take prompt action and check the accused statements under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPc). If anything is missed, the High Court can at that stage fix the same by examining the situation or directing the Trial Court to do the same. 

In the present case, the Apex Court has agreed to the decision of the High Court to acquit the husband. It was found that the dying declaration of the wife (vital prosecution evidence) was not put forward to the accused.

Brief Details of Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh (2025)

Genesis of the dispute

In the current case, an appeal is made challenging the decision of the High Court. Hasim Sheikh was convicted for the murder of his wife Amina, and 3 of his daughters. The murder was done by setting them on fire. The incident occurred in 2008 on 26th December. In this incident Hasim’s cousin Aslam also lost his life. Amina’s brother, Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh had filed an FIR. The brother had also claimed that Hasim has an abuse history. Amina had warned her brother that her life might be in danger. 

Amina and her daugther’s dying declaration implicated both Aslam and Hasim. On the basis of these declarations and other witness testimonies, Hasim was convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, by the Sessions Court. Hasim was sentenced to death calling it a rarest of rare case. The conviction was overturned by the High Court, and the court acquitted Hasim. The present appeal in the Supreme Court is filed by Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh in relation to this acquittal. 

Legal provisions involved in this case

Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

This provision deals with the power to examine the person who is accused of a crime. This provision helps the accused by giving them a chance to explain all the facts and evidence brought in the court against them. This section ensures that a fair chance is given to the accused to explain his side.

In order to clarify the accused’s side the court can at any stage ask questions. The court however has to ask the general questions to the accused once the prosecution witnesses are done. This section further states that the accused is not bound to any oath and does not have to necessarily speak only truth like the witnesses. 

If the accused does not answer any question, then he will not be punished for the same as well. The same goes for giving false answers too. At the time of deciding the case, the accused’s answers can be considered by the court. Both the defense lawyer and public prosecutor can help the court in framing the questions for the accused. A written statement by the accused is also allowed by the court. 

Key issues before the court in this case

1. Whether the dying declaration and testimonies were reliable in nature?
2. Whether the accused can be convicted solely on the basis of dying declarations and a testimony of a minor eyewitness?

Submission by both sides in Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh (2025)

Grounds raised by appellant

It was argued by the appellant that the Tahsildar had properly recorded the dying declarations of both Amina and Fatima after obtaining the certificate of witness from the doctor. The appellant further argued that these declarations were substantive evidence.

The appellant also argued that the testimony of the minor was credible in nature and was sufficient to convict the accused. The accused also had some burn marks which proved his involvement in the incident. 

Grounds raised by respondent

The respondent claims that testimony of the minor was not reliable as his capacity to testify was not checked. The substance of the dying declaration in question was not put forward to the accused at the time of questioning. This violated his chance at a fair trial. 

Judicial findings in Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh (2025)

The appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court. The Apex Court upheld the decision of the High Court of acquittal of the accused. The court invalidated the dying declaration of the wife and daughter. The Tahsildar had admitted that the recorded declarations were not read to the victims, hence their reliability is questionable.

The Supreme Court also stated that Section 313 of CrPc was clearly violated in this case as the dying declarations were not put to the accused when the trial was going on. The defence of the accused was prejudiced in this case. The court referred the case of Raj Kumar vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (2023) stating that it is the duty of the Trial Court to put all the material circumstances in front of the accused distinctly and clearly at the time of questioning under Section 313. 

The incident which took place was tragic and four people have died, however the evidence is not  procedully sound and legally admissible. 

Takeaways from this case

When an appeal against conviction is preferred before the High Court, at the earliest stage, the High Court must examine whether there is a proper statement of the accused recorded under Section 313 of CrPC (Section 351 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). If any defect is found, at that stage, the same can be cured either by High Court recording further statements or by directing the Trial Court to record. If this approach is adopted, the argument of delay and prejudice will not be available to the accused. Reliability of dying declarations and witness of minor was kept out of consideration as the vital prosecution evidence (dying declaration) was not put forward to the accused under Section 313.

References

• https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/why-supreme-court-upheld-acquittal-of-man-accused-of-murdering-wife-three-daughters
• https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/high-courts-must-check-s-313-crpcs351-bnss-compliance-at-earliest-to-avoid-acquittals-supreme-court-290017
• https://ijtr.nic.in/SCOPE%20and%20Significance%20313%20Cr.P.C..pdf 
• https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/supreme-court/accused-statement-313-crpc-cure-any-defects-at-the-earliest-2025-insc-529-aejaz-ahmad-sheikh-v-state-of-uttar-pradesh-1574968