Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Govind Gaurya Patil, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of his wife, Ranjana, by setting her on fire on 5 October 1998. He was acquitted of the offence under Section 498A IPC. The incident occurred when the deceased rushed to her mother's house after being set ablaze and informed her mother and nephew that the appellant had set her on fire. The deceased was taken to Sion Hospital, where two dying declarations were recorded on 6 October 1998: one by a police constable and another by a Special Executive Officer. She died on 9 October 1998. The prosecution examined six witnesses, including the mother (PW1) and the nephew (PW2). The trial court convicted the appellant based on the dying declarations. On appeal, the Bombay High Court examined the reliability of the dying declarations. The court noted that the first dying declaration was recorded by a police constable without a certificate from a doctor regarding the deceased's mental fitness to make a statement. The second declaration was recorded by a Special Executive Officer but also lacked a doctor's certificate. Moreover, there were inconsistencies between the two declarations: in one, the deceased stated that the appellant poured kerosene and set her on fire, while in the other, she stated that the appellant tried to extinguish the fire by dousing her with water. The mother's testimony also contradicted the dying declarations in some respects. The court held that a dying declaration not recorded by a Magistrate requires corroboration, and in this case, there was no independent corroboration. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt and allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and sentence. The appellant was ordered to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Sections 302, 498A Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC for setting his wife on fire. The prosecution relied on two dying declarations recorded by a police constable and a Special Executive Officer. The court found the dying declarations unreliable due to inconsistencies and the absence of a certificate from a doctor regarding the deceased's mental fitness. The court held that a dying declaration not recorded by a Magistrate requires corroboration, and in the absence of such corroboration, the conviction cannot be sustained. (Paras 2-5) B) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Recording by Police Officer - Evidentiary Value - Section 32 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The court observed that a dying declaration recorded by a police officer during investigation is not inadmissible but must be scrutinized with caution. In this case, the first dying declaration was recorded by a constable without a doctor's certificate, and the second declaration was recorded by a Special Executive Officer but also lacked a fitness certificate. The court held that these declarations were not reliable enough to base a conviction. (Paras 3-5) C) Criminal Law - Acquittal - Benefit of Doubt - Inconsistent Dying Declarations - The court found that the two dying declarations were inconsistent with each other and with the oral testimony of the mother. The deceased had stated in one declaration that the accused poured kerosene and set her on fire, but in another, she stated that the accused tried to extinguish the fire. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant was entitled to acquittal. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dying declarations of the deceased were reliable and sufficient to sustain the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Ordered to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be reliable and consistent
- Dying declaration not recorded by Magistrate requires corroboration
- Inconsistencies in dying declarations lead to acquittal
- Benefit of doubt to accused
