The Bombay high court has acquitted a 32-year-old man charged with killing his wife by setting her ablaze, observing that the prosecution failed to prove the crime so the benefit of doubt needed to be given to the accused.
The Bombay high court has acquitted a 32-year-old man charged with killing his wife by setting her ablaze, observing that the prosecution failed to prove the crime so the benefit of doubt needed to be given to the accused.
A division bench of justices PV Hardas and Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi acquitted Maruti Khade, observing: "In the absence of any corroborating or supporting evidence on record, it would be risky to place reliance on the oral dying declarations to convict theappellant. The circumstances on which the prosecution is placing reliance are not of a conclusive nature and tendency.
"On June 11, 2012, Thane sessions court had sentenced Khade to life imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs5,000. He approached the HC challenging his conviction.
On December 15, 2010, his wife Urmila was rushed to Thane civil hospital with 95 per cent burn injuries. She gave a statement to the police and special executive magistrate that her husband had poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze as she had gone to attend the wedding of her neighbour's daughter without his permission. She succumbed to her injuries the next day and Khade was arrested on December 28, when the police noticed burn injuries on his hands.
His advocate Abhishek Yende claimed that Khade was being framed. He argued that Khade had sustained the injuries while trying to extinguish the fire.
The PSI admitted that he had not written down the declaration: it was written by a scribe. "The crucial test for placing reliance on the evidence of dying declaration is that it should be proved to be in the words of the declarant (deceased), meaning thereby that it should be recorded by the person directly and not with the help of a scribe," observed the HC, adding that it "creates serious doubt about the veracity of the dying declaration.
"Also, the doctor who had examined Khade after his arrest said during the cross-examination that the "injuries (sustained by Khade) are possible in an attempt to extinguish the fire of another person."
The court also observed that the dying declaration suffered from "fatal infirmities"
The extent of the injuries sustained by Urmila are possible both in the case of suicidal and homicidal burns. The possibility of Urmila being questioned by her husband as to why she had gone to neighbour's wedding without his permission, in heat of anger Urmila committing suicide by setting herself ablaze, in the facts of the present case,cannot be ruled out," added judges.
){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}