Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Suresh Vishwanath Jadhav, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune for the murder of his wife Sangita under Section 302 IPC and for cruelty under Section 498A IPC. The prosecution case was that the appellant, a police constable, married Sangita in 1990-91. After the birth of a daughter, he started ill-treating and beating her. On 20th of an unspecified month, the appellant allegedly poured kerosene on Sangita and set her ablaze, causing her death. The trial court relied on two dying declarations: one recorded by the Executive Magistrate where Sangita stated she caught fire accidentally while cooking, and another recorded by the police where she implicated the appellant. The High Court found these dying declarations to be contradictory and unreliable. The court noted that the prosecution failed to explain the inconsistency and did not produce any independent corroboration. The court also observed that the evidence of cruelty was weak. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Inconsistency - Sections 302, 498A Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was convicted for murder of his wife based on two dying declarations. The first dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate stated that the deceased caught fire accidentally while cooking, while the second dying declaration recorded by the police stated that the appellant poured kerosene and set her ablaze. The court held that the two dying declarations are contradictory and unreliable, and the prosecution failed to explain the inconsistency. The conviction was set aside and the appellant was acquitted. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Law - Cruelty by Husband - Section 498A Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was also convicted for treating his wife with cruelty. The court held that the evidence of cruelty was weak and not corroborated by independent witnesses. Since the main charge of murder failed, the conviction under Section 498A also could not be sustained. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 based on dying declarations is sustainable when the dying declarations are inconsistent and lack corroboration.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- Conviction cannot be based solely on dying declaration without corroboration if there are inconsistencies
- Section 302 IPC requires proof of homicidal death
- Section 498A IPC requires proof of cruelty
- Benefit of doubt must be given to accused
