Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Vithal Kondiba Padghane, was convicted by the Sessions Judge, Nanded, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of his wife, Punyarathabai, by pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire. The incident occurred on 5 August 2011 at their residence in Koli, Taluka Hadgaon, District Nanded. The prosecution alleged that the accused suspected his wife's infidelity and had been ill-treating her. On the day of the incident, he scolded and beat her for not serving cooked vegetable to his brother's son, and later poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze. The deceased sustained 86% burns and was initially taken to PHC Hadgaon and then referred to Government Hospital, Nanded. She succumbed to her injuries on 9 August 2011. The trial court relied on two dying declarations: one recorded by the Executive Magistrate (PW5) on 6 August 2011, and another recorded by the police (PW7) on 7 August 2011. The first dying declaration did not name the accused as the perpetrator, while the second did. The appellant appealed against the conviction. The High Court examined the dying declarations and found material contradictions. The court noted that the first dying declaration was recorded by an independent magistrate and the deceased stated that she caught fire accidentally while cooking. The second dying declaration, recorded by a police officer, implicated the accused. The court held that such inconsistency creates doubt about the truthfulness of the declarations. The court also noted that the prosecution failed to explain the contradiction and did not provide any corroborative evidence. The court concluded that the prosecution had not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and acquitting the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court examined the evidentiary value of two dying declarations made by the deceased, which were contradictory in material particulars. The first declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate did not implicate the accused, while the second recorded by the police did. The court held that such inconsistency creates doubt and the prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Conviction set aside (Paras 10-15). B) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Corroboration - Section 32 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The court reiterated that a dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction if it is true, voluntary, and consistent. However, when there are multiple dying declarations that are contradictory, the court must scrutinize them carefully and if the inconsistency cannot be reconciled, the benefit of doubt must go to the accused (Paras 12-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dying declarations made by the deceased are 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.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- Conviction cannot be based on contradictory dying declarations
- Benefit of doubt when prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
