Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ganesh Anant Shirke, was convicted by the Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri, in Sessions Case No. 34 of 2001 for the murder of Naina Nandkumar Shirke, a 14-year-old girl, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prosecution alleged that on 26 January 2001 at about 6:00 p.m., there was a quarrel between the deceased and Manisha, the sister of the accused, at a public tap. Later, the accused and his family members came and abused the deceased and her parents. After they left, the accused entered the inner room of the deceased's house through the back door, poured rock-oil on her, and set her on fire. The deceased sustained burn injuries and later died. The prosecution relied on two dying declarations: one recorded by a police officer (Exhibit 28) and another recorded by a Special Executive Magistrate (Exhibit 29). The trial court convicted the accused based on these dying declarations. On appeal, the Bombay High Court scrutinized the evidence and found that the two dying declarations were inconsistent. In the first declaration, the deceased stated that the accused poured oil and set her on fire. In the second declaration, she stated that she did not know who set her on fire. The court noted that the medical evidence did not support the prosecution case, as the doctor opined that the burns were not possible in the manner alleged. The court also observed that there was no independent witness to corroborate the dying declarations. The court held that the inconsistencies in the dying declarations created doubt, and the prosecution failed to explain the discrepancy. Therefore, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Inconsistency - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302; Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 32 - The court examined two dying declarations of the deceased which were inconsistent with each other regarding the identity of the assailant and the manner of incident. The first declaration named the accused, while the second did not. The court held that such inconsistency creates doubt and the prosecution must explain the discrepancy. In the absence of corroboration, the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 4-6) B) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Corroboration - Necessity - Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 32 - The court emphasized that a dying declaration, though admissible without corroboration, must be scrutinized carefully. When there are multiple dying declarations that are inconsistent, the court must seek corroboration from other evidence. In this case, the medical evidence did not support the prosecution story, and the dying declarations were not corroborated by independent witnesses. (Paras 5-7) C) Criminal Law - Appeal - Acquittal - Benefit of Doubt - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - The appellant was convicted for murder based on dying declarations. On appeal, the High Court found the dying declarations unreliable and inconsistent. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt. (Paras 7-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dying declarations made by the deceased were reliable and consistent enough to sustain a conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted.
Law Points
- Dying declaration
- Corroboration
- Inconsistency
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 164 CrPC
- Section 32 Indian Evidence Act
