Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Dilip Sukhdeo Gaikwad, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, for the murder of his wife Tulsabai under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that on 28 May 2014, the appellant poured kerosene on the deceased and set her ablaze following a quarrel. The deceased was admitted to Civil Hospital, Jalgaon, where she succumbed to burn injuries. The father of the deceased, PW-1 Danu, lodged a report alleging murder. The trial court relied on dying declarations made by the deceased to her father and to the police. The appellant appealed against the conviction. The High Court, as the first appellate court, re-appreciated the evidence. It found that the dying declarations were inconsistent: in one declaration, the deceased stated that the appellant poured kerosene and set her on fire, while in another, she stated that she caught fire accidentally while cooking. The medical evidence also did not support the prosecution version. The court held that the dying declarations were not reliable and lacked corroboration. Consequently, the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Inconsistency - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court examined whether the dying declarations of the deceased were reliable and consistent. The deceased made multiple dying declarations which contradicted each other regarding the manner of the incident. The court held that when dying declarations are inconsistent and not corroborated by other evidence, the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 1-16) B) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Corroboration - Section 32 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The court reiterated that a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if it is reliable and consistent. However, in this case, the dying declarations were contradictory and the medical evidence did not support the prosecution version. Therefore, the conviction was set aside. (Paras 1-16)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC based on dying declarations is sustainable when the dying declarations are inconsistent and lack corroboration.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted.
Law Points
- Dying declaration
- Corroboration
- Inconsistency
- Benefit of doubt
- Section 302 IPC
