Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Mohammad Zakir Mohammad Bashir Solanki, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Sessions Case No.115/2016 for offences under Sections 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and life imprisonment respectively, along with fines. The prosecution case was that on 13.1.2016, the deceased Sahidabee Mohd. Zakir sustained 35% burns. Police Sub-Inspector Smt. P.S. Lanjewar (PW-5) recorded her statement (dying declaration) wherein she stated that her husband (the appellant) was a habitual drunkard and frequently quarreled with her. However, the dying declarations made by the deceased were inconsistent. The court noted that there were contradictions regarding how the incident occurred and the role of the appellant. The medical evidence did not fully support the prosecution's version. The appellant's counsel argued that the dying declarations were unreliable and that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The State argued that the dying declarations were sufficient for conviction. The court analyzed the evidence and found that the dying declarations were not consistent and lacked corroboration. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt and therefore allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and acquitting the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Inconsistencies - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 302, 307 - The court examined whether the dying declarations made by the deceased were consistent and reliable. The deceased made multiple dying declarations which contained contradictions regarding the manner of the incident and the role of the accused. The court held that when dying declarations are inconsistent and not corroborated by other evidence, they cannot form the sole basis for conviction. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Law - Murder - Attempt to Murder - Benefit of Doubt - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 302, 307 - The appellant was convicted for murder and attempt to murder. The prosecution relied on dying declarations which were found to be contradictory. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt and granted the benefit of doubt to the appellant, acquitting him of all charges. (Paras 11-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code based on dying declarations is sustainable when the dying declarations are inconsistent and lack corroboration.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order dated 23.10.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Sessions Case No.115/2016 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges. His bail bonds stand discharged.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- Corroboration of dying declaration is not mandatory but essential when inconsistencies exist
- Benefit of doubt when prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
