Case Note & Summary
The case involves two appeals against a conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for the murder of Meena, wife of appellant Sanjay. The prosecution alleged that on 16.8.1998, the appellants (Sanjay and Rohini) entered the victim's house, beat her, sprinkled kerosene, and set her on fire. The victim died from burn injuries. The trial court convicted both based on two dying declarations (Exh.21 and Exh.24) recorded by police officers, and testimony of witnesses about prior ill-treatment. On appeal, the High Court reappreciated the evidence and found that the two dying declarations were contradictory: Exh.21 implicated both accused, while Exh.24 exonerated one. The court held that such inconsistency creates reasonable doubt. Additionally, the court noted that the prosecution failed to explain why the earlier declaration was not treated as the FIR. The court also observed that the witnesses of ill-treatment did not directly connect the accused to the murder. Consequently, the court set aside the conviction and acquitted both appellants, allowing the appeals.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Inconsistency - Two dying declarations recorded by police officers were contradictory regarding the role of each accused - The first declaration (Exh.21) implicated both accused, while the second (Exh.24) exonerated one accused - Held that such inconsistency creates doubt and conviction cannot be sustained (Paras 4-6). B) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Recording by Police Officer - Admissibility - A dying declaration recorded by a police officer is admissible if the victim is conscious and fit to make the statement, as certified by a doctor - However, the court must scrutinize such evidence with caution (Para 4). C) Criminal Law - Common Intention - Section 34 IPC - For conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, there must be evidence of a common intention to cause death - In the absence of consistent dying declarations, the charge of common intention fails (Para 2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC based on two dying declarations is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The appeals are allowed. The conviction and sentence of the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC are set aside. The appellants are acquitted and directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- Contradictory dying declarations cannot form basis of conviction
- Police officer can record dying declaration if doctor certifies fitness
- Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC requires common intention
- Reappreciation of evidence in appeal
