IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K Suresh Reddy, K Sreenivasa Reddy, JJ.
Islavat Sakki Naik @ Sakki Naidu, - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep PP - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No: 1308/2016
Decided On : 09-08-2024
Criminal - Murder - IPC Section 302 - The court analyzed the dying declarations of the deceased, highlighting inconsistencies that undermined the prosecution's case, ultimately leading to the reversal of the conviction.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was charged with murdering the deceased by setting her on fire after a quarrel. The prosecution relied on two dying declarations, but both contained conflicting accounts of the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the two dying declarations were inconsistent and did not inspire confidence, leading to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues: Whether the evidence presented, particularly the dying declarations, was sufficient to uphold the conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that inconsistent dying declarations cannot be relied upon to establish guilt, leading to the conclusion that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient.
Result: The Criminal Appeal is allowed, and the conviction and sentence are set aside.
JUDGMENT :
K.Suresh Reddy, J.
Sole Accused in Sessions Case No. 103 of 2012 on the file of the Court of Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Vijayawada, is the appellant in the present Criminal Appeal. He was tried by the learned Sessions Judge under Section 302 IPC.
2. Substance of the charge is that on 07.05.2011 at about 02.30 P.M, the Accused committed murder of one Battula @ Islavat Malleswari (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) by pouring kerosene on her and setting fire to her, causing her death, thereby committed offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
3. After completion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge, convicted the appellant/Accused under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for "LIFE" and also to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- , in default to suffer imprisonment for a period of three (03) months.
4. Case of the prosecution, as per the evidence of prosecution witnesses, is as follows:-
The accused is a resident of Vambay colony, Singh Nagar, Vijayawada. The deceased is a resident of New Raja Rajeswari pet, Vijayawada. Pws-1 to 3 are the neighbours of the deceased. Pw-4 is the niece of the deceased. Pw-5 is the father of the deceased. Pw-6 is the brother of the deceased. The marriage of the deceased was performed with one Durga Rao and they were blessed with two children. Due to some ill-feelings between the husband and the deceased, the deceased left her matrimonial home and living separately. Thereafter, the deceased developed extra marital relationship with the accused, who is a married person. The deceased and the accused started living at New Raja Rajeswarpet, Vijayawada. The accused treated her well for some time and thereafter he used to altercate with the deceased by suspecting her fidelity. On 07.05.2011, at about 02.30 P.M, the accused visited the house of the deceased. The deceased arranged meals and while taking lunch, the accused picked up a quarrel with the deceased. Thereafter, the accused poured kerosene on her and set fire to her. On hearing the cries of the deceased, the neighbours i.e., Pws-1 to 3 rushed to the house of the deceased and put off the flames. Thereafter, the deceased was shifted to the Government General Hospital, Vijayawada in 108 ambulance. On 07.05.2011, the hospital authorities sent a requisition to Pw-12 i.e., I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada-Ex.P-16. After receiving Ex.P-16, Pw-12 went to the Government General Hospital and recorded statement of the deceased, which was marked as Ex.P-17. After receiving the hospital intimation, LW-17-Head Constable, Nunna Police Station, went to the Government General Hospital, Vijayawada and recorded statement of the deceased. The statement of the deceased recorded by Lw-17 was marked as Ex.P-19. Thereafter, Lw-17 returned to the police station. On the basis of Ex.P-19, he registered a case in Cr. No.314 of 2011 under Section 307 IPC and issued copies of FIRs to all the concerned. Ex.P-20 is the copy of FIR. He also examined Pw-5-father of the deceased and recorded his statement. On 08.05.2011, Lw-17 visited the scene of offence and prepared observation report-Ex.P- 13 in the presence of mediators. He also prepared rough sketch- Ex.P-21 at the scene of offence. He seized M.Os-1 to 4 from the scene of offence in the presence of mediators. He also secured the presence of Pws-1 to 2 and Lw-3, who are the neighbours of the deceased and who have witnessed the occurrence, examined them and recorded their statements. Of course, Lw-17 was not examined by the prosecution. The further investigation was taken over by Pw-13-Inspector of Police, Nunna Police Station.
5. On 11.05.2011, Pw-13- Inspector of Police, Nunna Police Station, received death intimation of the deceased from the Government General Hospital, Vijayawada, which was marked as Ex.P-22. On the basis of Ex.P-22, he altered the Section of law from Section 307 to 302 IPC and issued altered copy of FIR to all the concerned. Ex.P-23 is the altered copy of FI
Inconsistent dying declarations cannot support a conviction for murder under IPC Section 302.
The court affirmed that corroborated dying declarations are reliable for establishing guilt in homicide cases, especially when the accused fails to provide a plausible explanation under Section 106 o....
Dying declarations must be consistent and corroborated by independent evidence; inconsistencies can lead to reasonable doubt and acquittal.
The court established that actions leading to death can be classified as culpable homicide not amounting to murder based on the circumstances and intent.
Dying declarations, if consistent and credible, can support a conviction without corroboration, as established by the court.
The court established that inconsistencies in witness testimonies and dying declarations can lead to reasonable doubt, necessitating the acquittal of the accused.
The court determined that the accused's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder, based on the nature of injuries and intent, leading to a conviction under Section 304 Part-II IP....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in dying declarations led to acquittal for murder while confirming conviction for cruelty.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder and destruction of evidence, emphasizing the accused's failure to provide a reasonable explanation for the death of his wife.
Reliability of dying declarations is crucial for conviction under IPC Section 304(ii); conviction upheld as statements were consistent and trustworthy.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.