Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Hariomdas Govinddas Bainade, was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in Sessions Case No. 26 of 2018. The prosecution case was that the appellant, suspecting the chastity of his wife Kalpana, frequently beat her. On the intervening night of 04.10.2017 and 05.10.2017, the appellant allegedly poured kerosene on Kalpana and set her on fire, causing her death. The appellant also allegedly attempted to commit suicide by setting himself on fire. The trial court convicted the appellant based on circumstantial evidence, including a dying declaration made by Kalpana to a police officer and the testimony of witnesses. The appellant challenged the conviction before the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the dying declaration was not reliable as it was recorded without a doctor's certification and contained inconsistencies. The court also noted that the chain of circumstantial evidence was incomplete and that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant of all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302 IPC - The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence including last seen theory and dying declaration - The court found that the chain of circumstances was incomplete and the dying declaration was not reliable due to inconsistencies and lack of corroboration - Held that the conviction cannot be sustained and the appellant is entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-30). B) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The dying declaration was recorded by a police officer without certification of fitness by a doctor and contained contradictions - The court held that such a dying declaration cannot be the sole basis for conviction without corroboration (Paras 15-20). C) Criminal Law - Attempt to Suicide - Section 309 IPC - The appellant was also convicted for attempt to suicide - The court found that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the appellant attempted to commit suicide - Held that the conviction under Section 309 IPC is also set aside (Paras 25-28).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction under Sections 302 and 309 IPC set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Fine, if paid, to be refunded.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence must be complete and consistent with guilt
- Suspicion cannot replace proof
- Benefit of doubt must be given to accused
- Dying declaration must be voluntary and reliable
- Section 302 IPC requires proof of intention and act causing death
