Case Note & Summary
The case involves an appeal against conviction under Sections 498A and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The deceased Rajkanya was married to accused No.3 Arun, and accused Nos.1 and 2 were her in-laws. The prosecution alleged that on 30-10-2000, accused No.3, in a drunken state, quarreled with Rajkanya over their child's act, poured kerosene on her, and set her on fire while accused Nos.1 and 2 held her. Two dying declarations were recorded: one by a Naib Tahsildar (PW8) and another by a police officer. The first declaration stated that only accused No.3 poured kerosene and set her on fire, while the second implicated all three accused. The trial court convicted all three based on these declarations. On appeal, the High Court found the dying declarations to be contradictory and unreliable. The court noted that the first declaration was recorded after a medical fitness certificate, while the second was recorded later without such certification. The inconsistencies regarding the role of accused Nos.1 and 2 created doubt. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted all appellants, setting aside the conviction and ordering their release.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Inconsistent Dying Declarations - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 498A, 302 - The court examined two dying declarations which were contradictory regarding the role of accused. The first declaration exonerated the in-laws, while the second implicated them. The court held that such inconsistency creates doubt and cannot be the sole basis for conviction without corroboration. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Law - Benefit of Doubt - Acquittal - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 498A, 302 - Where the prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to unreliable dying declarations, the accused are entitled to acquittal. The court set aside the conviction and ordered the release of the appellants. (Paras 11-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dying declarations recorded are reliable and consistent enough to sustain a conviction under Sections 498A and 302 IPC.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellants acquitted of all charges. They are directed to be released forthwith if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- Conviction cannot be based on contradictory dying declarations
- Benefit of doubt when prosecution evidence is unreliable
