Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Gautam Bhila Ahire, was convicted by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge-1, Dhule in Sessions Case No.47 of 2007 for the murder of his wife, Rinabai, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that on 6 February 2007, the accused, under the influence of liquor, beat his wife and threw an ignited traditional kerosene lamp on her, causing her sari to catch fire. Rinabai sustained burn injuries and later died on 9 February 2007. The conviction was based primarily on two dying declarations: one recorded by ASI Prakash Wagh and another by Special Executive Magistrate Sardar Mansuri, as well as an oral dying declaration made to her mother, Pramilabai Sapkal. The appellant appealed against the conviction. The High Court examined the dying declarations and found material inconsistencies between them. In the first dying declaration, Rinabai stated that the accused threw the lamp on her, while in the second, she stated that the accused threw the lamp on her person. The oral dying declaration to the mother also differed in details. The court noted that the prosecution did not examine the doctor to certify that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make the dying declarations. The court held that the dying declarations were not consistent and did not inspire confidence. The court also observed that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Section 302 IPC - Inconsistencies in dying declarations - The court examined whether the dying declarations recorded by ASI and Executive Magistrate were reliable and consistent. Held that there were material inconsistencies between the two dying declarations and the oral dying declaration to the mother, and the prosecution failed to explain these discrepancies. Therefore, the conviction was not sustainable (Paras 1-10). B) Evidence Act - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The court held that a dying declaration must be consistent and inspire confidence. In this case, the dying declarations were not consistent with each other and with the medical evidence, and the prosecution did not examine the doctor to certify the mental fitness of the deceased. Hence, the dying declarations were not reliable (Paras 5-9). C) Criminal Law - Benefit of Doubt - Acquittal - Section 302 IPC - The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The inconsistencies in the dying declarations and lack of corroboration entitled the accused to the benefit of doubt. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the conviction was set aside (Para 10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of IPC based on dying declarations is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of the offence under Section 302 IPC. Fine, if paid, to be refunded.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- Conviction cannot be based on dying declaration alone without corroboration if there are inconsistencies
- Benefit of doubt must be given to accused if prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
