Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Vishnu Hari Khopkar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Vasai, for the murder of his wife Aruna under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that on 25.12.2010, the appellant, in a drunken state, poured kerosene on Aruna and set her ablaze. The deceased sustained 100% burns and died on 28.12.2010. The conviction was primarily based on dying declarations made by the deceased to her sister (PW1), to the police (Exh.23), and to the doctor (Exh.28). The appellant appealed against the conviction. The High Court re-appreciated the evidence and found that the dying declarations were inconsistent. In the first declaration to her sister, the deceased stated that the appellant poured kerosene and set her on fire. However, in the police statement, she did not name the appellant but said 'my husband' set her on fire. In the dying declaration recorded by the doctor, she stated that she caught fire from a stove while cooking. The court noted that the medical evidence showed that the burns were not consistent with a stove accident, but the inconsistencies in the dying declarations were material. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court also noted that there was no independent witness to the incident, and the sister's testimony was not corroborated. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court considered whether the dying declarations of the deceased were reliable and consistent. The deceased made multiple dying declarations which were contradictory regarding the presence of the appellant at the time of the incident. The court held that when dying declarations are inconsistent and not corroborated by other evidence, they cannot form the sole basis for conviction. The court emphasized that a dying declaration must be free from doubt and inspire confidence. (Paras 1-20) B) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Section 32 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The court examined the evidentiary value of dying declarations. It held that while a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if it is credible and consistent, in this case the declarations were contradictory. The court noted that the deceased had made statements to her sister, the police, and the doctor, which varied on material aspects. Therefore, the court found it unsafe to rely on them. (Paras 10-18) C) Criminal Procedure - Appeal against Conviction - Appreciation of Evidence - The court re-appreciated the evidence on record. It found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court observed that the medical evidence did not support the dying declarations, and there was no independent witness to the incident. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction. (Paras 19-22)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC 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. Fine, if paid, to be refunded.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- corroboration not essential but desirable
- conviction can be based on dying declaration if it inspires confidence
- contradictory dying declarations cannot form basis of conviction
