Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Shaikh Mustafa, was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for the murder of his wife, Chunni, by setting her on fire. The prosecution case rested primarily on two dying declarations made by the deceased. The first dying declaration was recorded by ASI Ramakant Thorat (PW4) at the hospital on 27.07.2014, which was treated as an FIR under Section 154 CrPC. The second dying declaration was recorded by Naib Tahsildar Balkrishna Wanjerkhedkar (PW5) on the same day. The deceased succumbed to her injuries on 02.08.2014. The trial court convicted the appellant based on these dying declarations. On appeal, the High Court examined the consistency and reliability of the dying declarations. The court found material inconsistencies between the two declarations: in the first, the deceased stated that her husband poured kerosene and set her on fire, while in the second, she stated that her husband poured kerosene but did not mention who ignited the fire. Additionally, the first declaration implicated the in-laws for latching the door, but the second declaration did not mention this. The court also noted that the doctor's certificate regarding the deceased's fitness to make a statement was not produced, and the medical evidence did not corroborate the dying declarations. The court held that when dying declarations are inconsistent, they require corroboration, and in the absence of such corroboration, the conviction cannot be sustained. The court also observed that the prosecution failed to prove the motive and the circumstances did not conclusively establish the appellant's guilt. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Corroboration - Inconsistency - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court examined the admissibility and reliability of two dying declarations recorded on the same day. The first dying declaration (Exh.47) recorded by ASI and the second (Exh.57) recorded by Naib Tahsildar contained material inconsistencies regarding the role of the appellant and the presence of in-laws. The court held that when dying declarations are inconsistent, the court must seek corroboration. In the absence of corroboration, the conviction cannot be sustained. (Paras 10-20) B) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Recording by Police Officer - Section 154 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The first dying declaration was recorded by a police officer as a statement under Section 154 CrPC. The court held that such a statement can be treated as a dying declaration if the declarant dies, but it must be scrutinized with caution. (Paras 8-12) C) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Medical Fitness - The court noted that the doctor's certificate regarding the fitness of the deceased to make a statement was not produced. The absence of such certificate raises doubt about the voluntariness and accuracy of the dying declarations. (Paras 15-18) D) Criminal Law - Circumstantial Evidence - Motive - The prosecution alleged that the appellant demanded money for liquor and set the deceased on fire. However, the court found that the motive was not sufficiently proved and the circumstances did not conclusively point to the guilt of the appellant. (Paras 22-25)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 based on dying declarations is sustainable when the dying declarations are inconsistent and not corroborated by other evidence.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside. Appellant acquitted.
Law Points
- Dying declaration
- corroboration
- inconsistency
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 304B IPC
- Section 498A IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Section 504 IPC
- Section 154 CrPC
- Section 161 CrPC
- Section 164 CrPC
- Section 313 CrPC
- Evidence Act 1872
