The Bombay high court recently acquitted a 30-year-old man and his 62-year-old mother who were sentenced to suffer life imprisonment for murdering his wife in 2011. The accused were alleged to have set the woman on fire by pouring kerosene on her. The court, while releasing the accused, held the dying declaration of the deceased given to the police in the presence of relatives as highly 'unsafe to rely on'.
Q What does the high court say?
On August 20, a division bench of Justice VK Tahilramani and Justice AR Joshi acquitted Santosh Vaidu and his mother Alkabai Vaidu, who have been lodged at the Yerawada prison in Pune since their arrest in 2011.
The court, while disbelieving the dying declaration given by Sunita, the deceased, said: "A dying declaration is relevant and material evidence in the prosecution of the assailants and a truthful and reliable dying declaration may form the sole basis of conviction, even though it is not corroborated. But the court must be satisfied that the declaration is truthful."
Q The prosecution's case
Santosh had married Sunita in 2006. It was alleged that after a year the accused started harassing her. On June 27, 2011, when the deceased was sleeping, the accused poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze. The neighbours, hearing Sunita scream, rushed to extinguish the fire and rushed her to a hospital. The next day, Sunita succumbed to her injuries.
Q Case under sections of IPC
Police registered a case against the accused under section 498 (A) (Dowry Harassment) and section 302 (Murder) of the Indian Penal Code. The police recorded the dying declaration of the victim while she was in hospital and this was an important piece of evidence in the trial.
Q Conviction of the accused
The accused, however, denied the charges and claimed of being falsely implicated. However, in 2012, the Pune sessions court convicted the accused for murder.
Advocate DG Khamkar, appearing for the accused, pointed out discrepancies in recording of the dying declaration. Khamkar argued that the mother of the deceased, Lata, who is the most interested party and one of the prosecution witnesses, was present at the time of recording the declaration.
Lata had stated in her evidence that she was angry with the appellants (accused).
Q On recording of the declaration
The bench, after going through the evidence and arguments, noted, "While recording the dying declaration, it is necessary to ensure that except the person recording the dying declaration, at the most, the medical officer should be present and no relative or friend or any other person should be present. This is to ensure that the patient is not tutored or deterred while making the dying declaration. These are essentials to attach credibility to a dying declaration."
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}