Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Adawayya @ Swami Kuntainawar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa, for the murder of his wife by pouring diesel on her and setting her on fire on 23 June 2013 at their rented room in Chopdem, Pernem, Goa. The deceased succumbed to her injuries on 26 June 2013 at Goa Medical College, Bambolim. The prosecution examined 16 witnesses, including the Special Executive Magistrate who recorded the dying declaration, the doctor who certified her fitness, and the investigating officer. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed the deceased was not his wife, though he admitted to frequent quarrels. The trial court found the dying declaration reliable and convicted him under Section 302 IPC, sentencing him to life imprisonment and a fine of ₹10,000. On appeal, the High Court examined the dying declaration's voluntariness and consistency with medical evidence, noting that the deceased was conscious and coherent when making the statement. The court also considered motive evidence from witnesses about quarrels over money. The appellant's defence that the deceased committed suicide was rejected as unsupported. The High Court upheld the conviction, finding no reason to interfere with the trial court's well-reasoned judgment.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Section 302 IPC - Reliability - The dying declaration of the deceased implicating the appellant was recorded by a Special Executive Magistrate and a doctor, and was found to be voluntary, coherent, and consistent with medical evidence. The court held that a dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction if it inspires confidence and is free from tutoring. (Paras 10-15) B) Criminal Law - Motive - Section 302 IPC - Relevance - The prosecution established motive through evidence of frequent quarrels and the deceased's refusal to give money to the appellant. The court held that while motive is not essential when direct evidence exists, its presence strengthens the prosecution case. (Paras 16-18) C) Criminal Procedure - Examination of Accused - Section 313 CrPC - Use of Statement - The appellant's statement under Section 313 CrPC denying the deceased was his wife but admitting quarrels cannot be used as substantive evidence against him. However, the court may consider it to fill gaps in prosecution evidence. (Para 20) D) Evidence Law - Hearsay Evidence - Dying Declaration - Admissibility - The dying declaration was recorded by a competent magistrate and attested by a doctor, making it admissible under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The court rejected the defence argument that the declaration was tutored. (Paras 12-14)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC for murder of his wife by pouring diesel and setting her on fire is sustainable based on the dying declaration and other circumstantial evidence.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC.
Law Points
- Dying declaration can be sole basis of conviction if reliable
- Motive is relevant but not essential when direct evidence exists
- Section 313 CrPC statement cannot be used as substantive evidence
- Defence of alimony dispute not sufficient to rebut prosecution case
