Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of Poonam Bai, who was convicted under Section 302 IPC by the High Court for the murder of Vimla Bai. The prosecution case was that on 01.11.2001, the appellant, niece of the deceased, poured kerosene on Vimla Bai and set her on fire. The deceased sustained 100% burns and died. The trial court acquitted the appellant, but the High Court reversed and convicted her. The Supreme Court examined the evidence, primarily the dying declarations. The written dying declaration (Exh.P2) recorded by the Naib Tehsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate was found unreliable because only a photocopy was produced, the original was missing, no doctor certified the victim's fitness, and the magistrate did not assess her condition. The oral dying declarations made to P.W.2, P.W.3, and P.W.4 were also disbelieved as they were not mentioned in their Section 161 CrPC statements and were improved versions. The Supreme Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the dying declarations beyond reasonable doubt. The trial court's acquittal was based on valid reasons and was not perverse; hence, the High Court erred in reversing it. The appeal was allowed, the High Court judgment set aside, and the trial court's acquittal restored. The appellant was ordered to be released forthwith.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Section 302 IPC - The prosecution relied on a written dying declaration (Exh.P2) recorded by the Naib Tehsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate and oral dying declarations. The Supreme Court held that the written dying declaration was not trustworthy because only a photocopy was produced, no original, no doctor's certification, and the magistrate did not verify the victim's fitness. The oral dying declarations were improved versions not mentioned in Section 161 CrPC statements. Hence, the dying declarations were not proved beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 10-15). B) Criminal Procedure - Appeal against Acquittal - Reversal by High Court - Section 378 CrPC - The trial court had acquitted the appellant after evaluating the evidence. The High Court reversed without adverting to the reasons given by the trial court. The Supreme Court held that the trial court's view was the only possible view and not perverse, so the High Court was not justified in convicting the appellant (Paras 13, 16). C) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Admissibility of Photocopy - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The original dying declaration was not produced; only a photocopy was placed on record. The Supreme Court noted that the photocopy is not admissible in evidence, and no reasons were given for non-production of the original (Para 11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dying declarations (written and oral) were reliable enough to convict the appellant under Section 302 IPC, and whether the High Court was justified in reversing the trial court's acquittal.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, restored the trial court's acquittal, and ordered the appellant's release forthwith if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be trustworthy
- voluntary
- blemishless and reliable
- absence of doctor's certification is not fatal if declarant is fit
- oral dying declaration is weak evidence
- appellate court should not reverse acquittal unless trial court's view is perverse
