Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Madhukar Baswant Barora, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan on 3rd July 2012 for offences under Sections 366(A), 376, 306 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution was that on 11th October 2009, the appellant threatened the victim at knife point, dragged her into a forest near Lenadi River, raped her, detained her, and sexually assaulted her throughout the day. On 13th October 2009, she was dropped near her house and subsequently set herself on fire, sustaining 82% burn injuries. She succumbed to her injuries on 19th October 2009. The victim made multiple dying declarations: one to the police (Exhibit 28), one to the Executive Magistrate (Exhibit 29), and one to her mother (Exhibit 30). The court found that these declarations were inconsistent regarding the identity of the assailant and the sequence of events. The medical evidence did not corroborate the allegations of rape. The court held that the dying declarations were not reliable and the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Inconsistent Dying Declarations - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 366(A), 376, 306, 506 - The deceased made multiple dying declarations which were contradictory regarding the identity of the assailant and the circumstances of the incident. The court held that when dying declarations are inconsistent and not corroborated by other evidence, they cannot form the sole basis for conviction. The appellant was acquitted as the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-17).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 366(A), 376, 306 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the dying declarations of the deceased which are inconsistent and lack corroboration.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted. Fine, if paid, to be refunded.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- conviction cannot be based on contradictory dying declarations
- benefit of doubt must be given to accused when prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
