Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Shaikh Khaled, was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for the murder of his wife Rukhsana by burning. The prosecution case relied heavily on an oral dying declaration made by the deceased to her uncle, P.W.4, that the appellant poured kerosene and set her on fire. The appellant challenged the conviction on the ground that the dying declaration was unreliable and there were material contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. The High Court analyzed the testimonies of P.W.4, P.W.5 (mother), P.W.7 (neighbor), and P.W.8 (another neighbor). The court noted that P.W.4's testimony was inconsistent with the medical evidence regarding the time of death and the condition of the deceased. The court also found that the dying declaration was not corroborated by other independent witnesses. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and that the dying declaration was not trustworthy. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was convicted for murder of his wife based on an oral dying declaration made to the uncle. The court found the dying declaration unreliable due to inconsistencies in the prosecution witnesses' testimonies and lack of corroboration. Held that the conviction cannot be sustained and the appellant is entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-22).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 based on oral dying declaration is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be reliable and consistent
- conviction cannot be based solely on uncorroborated dying declaration if there are inconsistencies
- benefit of doubt must be given to accused
