Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Inconsistencies in Dying Declarations. The High Court's reliance on a single dying declaration without corroboration was found to be erroneous.

In Favour of Accused
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant challenged her conviction for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, after the High Court reversed her acquittal by the Sessions Court. The prosecution alleged that the appellant, along with others, set fire to her daughter-in-law, Sunita, due to dowry demands and ill-treatment. Sunita suffered severe burns and made multiple dying declarations implicating the appellant. However, the Sessions Court acquitted all accused, citing inconsistencies in the dying declarations and lack of corroborative evidence. The State appealed, and the High Court convicted the appellant based on one of the dying declarations, asserting it was voluntary and truthful. The appellant contended that the High Court erred in disregarding the acquittal and failing to corroborate the evidence. The Supreme Court found that the High Court's acceptance of the dying declaration was flawed, as it lacked corroboration and ignored the inconsistencies present in the other declarations. The Court emphasized that the prosecution did not meet its burden of proof, and the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt. Consequently, the Supreme Court quashed the High Court's judgment, acquitting the appellant of all charges and ordering her release.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Dying Declarations - Inconsistency - The High Court accepted one dying declaration while discarding others, leading to a conviction under Section 302 IPC - The Sessions Court had found inconsistencies in the dying declarations, which warranted the benefit of doubt to the appellant - Held that the High Court's acceptance of one declaration without corroboration was erroneous (Paras 29-30).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the High Court erred in reversing the acquittal of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court quashed the High Court's judgment, acquitting the appellant of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and ordered her release.

Law Points

  • Dying declarations
  • Section 302 IPC
  • common intention
  • benefit of doubt
  • corroboration of evidence
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (SC) (11) 25

Criminal Appeal No. 118 of 2018

2026-11-05

Atul S. Chandurkar, Ujjal Bhuyan

2026 INSC 1196

Dilip Taur, Raman Yadav

Sau. Kamalbai Waman Patil

The State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for murder.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to overturn her conviction and restore the acquittal.

Filing Reason

The State appealed against the acquittal of the appellant by the Sessions Court.

Previous Decisions

The Sessions Court acquitted all accused due to inconsistencies in the evidence.

Issues

Whether the High Court erred in reversing the acquittal of the appellant. Whether the dying declarations were sufficient to sustain a conviction.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant's counsel argued that the High Court ignored the inconsistencies in the dying declarations and the lack of corroborative evidence. The respondent's counsel contended that the dying declaration was voluntary and supported by other evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court's conviction based solely on one dying declaration was flawed due to the absence of corroborative evidence and the presence of inconsistencies in the statements.

Judgment Excerpts

The Sessions Court was correct in holding that in view of inconsistency in the three dying declarations, the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt. The High Court's acceptance of one declaration without corroboration was erroneous.

Procedural History

The appellant was initially acquitted by the Sessions Court, which was later challenged by the State in the High Court, resulting in her conviction, which was subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 302, Section 498A, Section 342, Section 406
  • Evidence Act, 1872: Section 106
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Quashes Magistrate's Commitment Order in IPC Case Due to Lack of Reasoned Order -- Applicant Challenges Commitment Under Section 467 IPC to Sessions Court Without Evidence Discussion
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Excise Duty on Tobacco — Legislative Competence Affirmed. The provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, were upheld as valid under item 45 of List I, despite claims of legislative overreach i...