Case Note & Summary
The appeal arose from the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar. The prosecution case was that the deceased, wife of the appellant, sustained 96% burns on the night of 27.09.2001 while sleeping with the appellant and children. She was taken to hospital by the appellant, where a dying declaration was recorded by a Special Judicial Magistrate. The deceased alleged that her husband poured kerosene and set her on fire due to a quarrel over his extramarital affair. She later succumbed to injuries. The trial court convicted the appellant, sentencing him to life imprisonment. On appeal, the defence argued that the dying declaration was unreliable due to inconsistencies about thumb and toe impressions, possible tutoring, and the appellant’s efforts to extinguish the fire and hospitalise the deceased, indicating lack of intention to murder. The father of the deceased did not support the prosecution. The High Court examined the evidence, particularly the dying declaration. The Special Judicial Magistrate and the doctor both testified to the process of recording, but neither testified to the contents of the declaration. The court held that the prosecution had not proved the contents of the dying declaration, and therefore it could not form the basis of conviction. The appeal was allowed, the conviction set aside, and the appellant acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Proof of Contents - Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 32; Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - The prosecution relied on a dying declaration recorded by a Special Judicial Magistrate in the presence of a doctor. Both witnesses deposed that the declaration was recorded, but neither stated its contents. The court held that without such testimony, the dying declaration could not be said to have been proved. Held that the prosecution failed to prove the dying declaration, and the conviction could not be sustained (Paras 6-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused under Section 302 IPC beyond reasonable doubt, particularly the genuineness and proof of the dying declaration.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction under Section 302 IPC, and acquitted the appellant, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the dying declaration and thus the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be proved by examining the person who recorded it and the person in whose presence it was recorded
- mere recording of dying declaration without proving its contents is insufficient
- contents of dying declaration must be deposed by witnesses to be admissible.
