Brief Facts
- The present Appeal arose from an incident dated 07.05.1987 involving Smt. Madhu, who had been married to respondent No.1 Brij Lal for about four years. According to her initial statement given to the police in the morning, she alleged that after marriage she was subjected to continuous cruelty and harassment by her husband and his family members in connection with dowry demands. On the afternoon of 06.05.1987, while she was alone at home with her husband, it was alleged that the door was bolted from inside and her husband poured kerosene oil on her and set her on fire. She sustained serious burn injuries but survived initially and was taken to the hospital.
- On the same day, she made another statement before a Magistrate wherein she stated that she had poured kerosene on herself and thereafter her husband ignited the fire. Subsequently, she also made a third statement in which allegations were confined mainly to harassment for dowry without specifically attributing the act of burning. After battling burn injuries for more than one and a half months, Smt. Madhu succumbed on 29.06.1987.
- Following investigation, the accused were charge-sheeted for offences under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 302 and 307 IPC. After trial, the Ld. Trial Court acquitted all the accused.
- Hence the present Appeal
Issues
- Whether a dying declaration can be relied upon as the sole basis of conviction without corroboration, and if so, under what circumstances, particularly where the dying declaration suffers from inherent weaknesses or where multiple dying declarations disclose material inconsistencies or contradictions requiring heightened judicial scrutiny?
- Where more than one dying declaration exists, which declaration is to be relied upon?
- Under what circumstances can an appellate court interfere with and reverse an order of acquittal?
Held
- The High Court dismissed the Appeal as the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The findings of the Court are as under:
- The law on the issue of dying declaration can be summarized to the effect that in case, the Court comes to the conclusion that the dying declaration is true and reliable, has been recorded by a person at a time when the deceased was fit physically and mentally to make the declaration and it has not been made under any tutoring/duress/ prompting; it can be the sole basis for recording conviction. In such an eventuality no corroboration is required. In case, there are multiple dying declarations and there are inconsistencies between them, generally, the dying declaration recorded by the higher officer like a Magistrate can be relied upon, provided that there is no circumstance giving rise to any suspicion about its truthfulness.
- Additionally, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Phoolchand Rathore reported in 2023 CriLR 724, while observing that courts are generally reluctant to interfere with an order of acquittal, recognized that such interference is warranted when it becomes evident that the acquittal was based on an entirely flawed reasoning process, legally erroneous, and involved a perverse approach to the facts of the case. In such circumstances, where the order of acquittal has led to a grave and substantial miscarriage of justice, the Court may reverse the acquittal and convert it into a conviction.
- The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Phoolchand Rathore reported in 2023 CriLR 724, while observing that courts are generally reluctant to interfere with an order of acquittal, recognized that such interference is warranted when it becomes evident that the acquittal was based on an entirely flawed reasoning process, legally erroneous, and involved a perverse approach to the facts of the case. In such circumstances, where the order of acquittal has led to a grave and substantial miscarriage of justice, the Court may reverse the acquittal and convert it into a conviction.
Relevant Para No.
- 6, 12 and 13