The failure to put the contents of the dying declarations to the accused under Section 313 CrPC resulted in prejudice to the accused, and the dying declarations could not be used against him in the absence of any other evidence.

Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302 IPC - DYING DECLARATION - SECTION 313 CRPC - ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE - INTERPRETATION OF LEGAL PROVISIONS - EFFECT OF NOT PUTTING CONTENTS OF DYING DECLARATIONS TO ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 313 CRPC - PREJUDICE TO ACCUSED - EXCLUSION OF DYING DECLARATIONS FROM CONSIDERATION - FAILURE OF PROSECUTION TO PROVE GUILT BEYOND DOUBT - DISMISSAL OF APPEAL AND CONFIRMATION OF ACQUITTAL.
Fact of the Case:

The State of Andhra Pradesh appealed against the acquittal of the accused in a case where he was charged with murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The prosecution's case was based on two dying declarations, one recorded by a Magistrate and the other by a police officer. However, all the material witnesses turned hostile, and the accused was acquitted by the trial court.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the failure to put the contents of the dying declarations to the accused during his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) resulted in substantial prejudice to the accused. The court relied on several Supreme Court judgments which held that the accused must be given an opportunity to explain any incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence adduced by the prosecution. The court further held that the dying declarations could not be used against the accused since they were not put to him during his examination under Section 313 CrPC.
Issues: 1. Whether the failure to put the contents of the dying declarations to the accused under Section 313 CrPC resulted in prejudice to the accused? 2. Whether the dying declarations could be used against the accused in the absence of any other evidence?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the failure to put the contents of the dying declarations to the accused under Section 313 CrPC resulted in prejudice to the accused. The court relied on several Supreme Court judgments which held that the accused must be given an opportunity to explain any incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence adduced by the prosecution. 2. The court held that the dying declarations could not be used against the accused since they were not put to him during his examination under Section 313 CrPC.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court.

JUDGMENT

C.PRAVEEN KUMAR, J. - The State of Andhra Pradesh preferred this Appeal against the Order of acquittal, dtd. 27/1/2012, passed by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool, wherein the sole Accused who was tried for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 [for short, 'I.P.C."], was acquitted of the said charge. As all the material witnesses have turned hostile, we deem it appropriate to refer to the allegations in the charge-sheet.

2. Boya Meenuga Adilaxmamma ("deceased") married one Raghu Ramudu of Sivapuram Village, Kothapalli Mandal, about 12 years prior to the incident. Nine years prior, the husband of the deceased died. Since then, she along with her children were staying at Indireswaram Village. It is said that, since three years, the accused, who was residing near their house, developed intimacy and started frequently visiting the house and staying with her, though he is having wife and children. It is said that suspecting her fidelity, the accused was harassing and beating the deceased. The deceased was working as "Aaya" in Anganwadi Centre, and also cultivating Ac.0.50 cents ( 1/2 acre) of her paddy field.

3. On 19/8/2010, the accused went to his filed and also informed the deceased to go to her field. Looking after the work at the field, the deceased returned to her house, by which time the accused was already present in the house. He is said to have questioned the deceased for the delay and also suspected her fidelity. A quarrel ensued with her in this regard.

4. At about 11.00 p.m., when the deceased was heating water on firewood oven, the accused is said to have picked up kerosene can from the oven, poured the same and set the deceased on fire with a match stick. The averments in the charge-sheet show that while pouring kerosene a part of the kerosene also fell on the hand of the accused and caught fire, leading to some burn injuries to both his hands and nose. The people who gathered there shifted the injured to Community Health Centre, Atmakur.

5. On 20/8/2010 at about 1.00 p.m., while PW15 [SubInspector of Police] was in Police Station, Atmakur, he received a Medical Intimation under Ex.P19, about the admission of the injured at Community Health Centre, Atmakur. As PW13 [Doctor] had sent the injured to Government General Hospital, Kurnool, PW1 reached the Hospital at 1.00 p.m. He identified the injured and after ascertaining the mental condition, recorded the statement of the injured which is placed on record as Ex.P20.

6. The duty doctor present there certified the declaration with an endorsement, which is placed on record as Ex.P.21. On the basis of Ex.P.20, PW15 registered a case in Cr.No.109/2010 for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 I.P.C. Ex.P.22 is F.I.R. Thereafter, PW15 again went to Government General Hospital, Kurnool, were he secured the presence of PWs.1 to 3 and recorded their statements. Then, he visited the scene of offence, i.e., the house of the deceased and prepared a rough sketch, which is marked as Ex.P.23. At the scene, he seized burnt saree pieces, burnt petticoat and plastic kerosene lamp, which are marked as MOs.1 to 3. Ex.P24 is the seizure proceedings. On the next day morning, he went to the same Village and examined PWs 4 to 6.

7. On 25/8/2010, PW15 received Death Intimation of the injured, pursuant to which he issued an altered F.I.R., altering the Sec. of law to one under 302 I.P.C. Ex.25 is the altered F.I.R. Further investigation, in this case, was taken up by PW16.

8. Before proceeding further, it is to be noted here that, on 20/8/2010 at about 7.45 a.m., i.e., much prior to PW15 proceeding to the hospital and recording the statement, Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Excise Court, Kurnool, [PW12] on receipt of intimation from Government General Hospital, Kurnool, proceeded to the said Hospital, identified the injured, being satisfied with regard to the mental status of the injured and after obtaining necessary certificate from the Doctor, reco