Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 5.2.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No.214/2007, whereby the respondent-accused Ashok Salame was acquitted of offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prosecution case was that on 21.3.2007, the accused picked up a quarrel with the deceased Pratibha at her house, dragged her to his house, poured kerosene on her, and set her on fire, causing burn injuries that led to her death. The prosecution relied on two written dying declarations and an oral dying declaration made by the deceased. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding inconsistencies between the dying declarations and between the dying declarations and medical evidence. The High Court heard the appeal, with the Additional Public Prosecutor arguing that the trial court erred in acquitting despite the dying declarations. The court examined the evidence and found that the trial court's view was plausible and not perverse. The High Court held that in an appeal against acquittal, interference is warranted only if the findings are perverse or unreasonable. Since the dying declarations were inconsistent and lacked corroboration, the benefit of doubt was rightly given to the accused. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - Inconsistencies - The court examined whether the dying declarations made by the deceased were consistent and reliable to convict the accused for murder under Section 302 IPC. The trial court found contradictions between the oral dying declaration and the written dying declarations, and between the dying declarations and medical evidence. The High Court held that the trial court's view was plausible and did not warrant interference, as the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 1-6) B) Criminal Law - Appeal Against Acquittal - Scope - Interference - The High Court considered the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It held that unless the trial court's findings are perverse or unreasonable, the appellate court should not substitute its own view. The court found no perversity in the acquittal and dismissed the appeal. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the accused for offences under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, based on alleged inconsistencies in dying declarations, is sustainable.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the accused.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be consistent and reliable
- corroboration required when inconsistencies exist
- benefit of doubt to accused in case of doubt
