Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Satish Mahadeo Kale, was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of his wife, Manisha, by setting her on fire. The prosecution relied on two dying declarations made by the deceased to the police and a Special Executive Magistrate. The High Court found that the dying declarations were inconsistent with each other and with the medical evidence. The court noted that the first dying declaration recorded by the police was not signed by the deceased and the second dying declaration recorded by the Magistrate contained contradictions regarding the manner of the incident. The court also observed that the prosecution failed to examine independent witnesses and the sister-in-law who was present at the scene. The court held that the conviction based on such unreliable dying declarations cannot be sustained and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court examined whether the dying declarations made by the deceased were consistent and reliable. It found contradictions between the two dying declarations and lack of corroboration from other evidence. Held that the conviction cannot be sustained solely on the basis of inconsistent dying declarations (Paras 1-13).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC based on dying declarations is sustainable when there are inconsistencies and lack of corroboration
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Fine, if paid, to be refunded.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- conviction cannot be based solely on dying declaration if there are contradictions
- benefit of doubt must be given to accused
