Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Rajeeb Dhathi, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Arunkumar Katchap and sentenced to life imprisonment by the XVIII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai. The prosecution alleged that on 06.12.2016, the appellant hit the deceased on the head with a stone following a dispute over money. The deceased died on 14.12.2016. The appellant challenged the conviction in the Madras High Court. The court examined the evidence, particularly the oral dying declaration made to PW1 (Ramesh) and the circumstantial evidence. PW1 claimed the deceased told him the appellant hit him, but the court found PW1's testimony inconsistent and uncorroborated. The Sub Inspector (PW14) did not confirm receiving any dying declaration. The recovery of the stone (M.O.1) was not witnessed by independent persons, and the motive was weak. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. The court directed his release unless required in another case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Dying Declaration - Section 302 IPC - The prosecution relied on the oral dying declaration made by the deceased to PW1, but the court found that PW1's testimony was inconsistent and unreliable, as he claimed to have translated the deceased's statement from Hindi to the Sub Inspector, yet the Sub Inspector did not corroborate this. The dying declaration was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 10-15) B) Criminal Law - Circumstantial Evidence - Chain of Circumstances - Section 302 IPC - The prosecution's case was based on circumstantial evidence, including motive and recovery of weapon. However, the court held that the circumstances did not form a complete chain pointing only to the guilt of the accused. The recovery of the stone was not witnessed by independent persons, and the motive was weak. (Paras 16-20) C) Criminal Law - Benefit of Doubt - Acquittal - Section 302 IPC - The court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt, and the conviction and sentence were set aside. (Paras 21-22)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC based on the dying declaration and circumstantial evidence is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment of conviction and sentence dated 15.07.2019 in S.C.No.200 of 2017 passed by the learned XVIII Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges. The appellant is directed to be released forthwith unless his presence is required in any other case.
Law Points
- Dying declaration must be reliable and free from tutoring
- Circumstantial evidence must form complete chain
- Benefit of doubt when prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
