Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K. Sreenivasa Reddy, J.
Shaik Madar Miah - Appellant
Vs.
The State of AP., Rep. by its Public Prosecutor - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1072 OF 2008
Decided On : 02-04-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 and Section 304-Part I - Conviction for murder - Accused initially charged under Section 302 IPC but convicted under Section 304-Part I IPC for causing death of wife by burning - Prosecution's case relied heavily on dying declarations, which contained contradictions and inconsistencies - Court found insufficient evidence to uphold conviction. (Paras 4, 21, 22)
(B) Dying Declarations - Legal standards - Dying declarations must be consistent and corroborated by independent evidence to be reliable - In this case, contradictions in dying declarations led to reasonable doubt regarding the accused's guilt. (Paras 21, 22)
Facts of the case:
The accused was charged with murdering his wife by setting her on fire after a quarrel. The prosecution's case was based on dying declarations made by the deceased, which were inconsistent. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 304-Part I IPC.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to contradictions in the dying declarations and lack of corroborative evidence.
Issues: The main issues were the reliability of the dying declarations and whether the prosecution proved the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the inconsistencies in the dying declarations were material and undermined the prosecution's case, leading to the conclusion that the accused was entitled to the benefit of the doubt.
Result: Criminal Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside; accused acquitted.
JUDGMENT :
K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J.
Sole accused in Sessions Case No.589 of 2007 on the file of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool is the appellant in the present Criminal Appeal.
2. The appellant/Accused was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
3. Substance of the charge against the accused is that, on 13th May, 2007, at about 02.00 pm, at his house situated at Nandikotkur village, he caused the death of his wife namely Shaik Sadik Bee (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') by pouring kerosene on her and setting fire to her with match sticks, thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
4. After completion of trial, learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused of the offence punishable under Section 304-Part I IPC, instead of convicting him under Section 302 IPC, and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of ten (10) years and also to pay fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred only), in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of three (3) months.
5. Case of the prosecution, briefly, is as follows.
i) The deceased was a native of Alampur and she was given in marriage to the accused of Nandikotkur Town about 10 years ago. The deceased was blessed with three daughters and a son. While so, on the invitation of her parents, on 11.05.2007, the deceased went to her parents' house at Alampur, along with the accused and their children, to celebrate Garmi festival. After celebrating the festival, on 13.05.2007, at about 09.00 a.m., the deceased, along with her husband and children, left Alampur to go to Nandikotkur and they reached their home at Nandikotkur at about 02.00 pm. The moment they reached their house, the accused picked up a quarrel with the deceased saying that she unnecessarily took him to her parents house for Garmi festival and forced him to spend all the money with him. So saying, he brought kerosene bottle from his house and attempted to pour kerosene on the deceased. On seeing it, one Shaik Hajira Bee (P.W.5) went and informed the same to Shaik Murthuja Bee (P.W.2), who is the mother of the accused. Then PWs.2 and 5 proceeded to the house of the accused. By the time they reached near the house of the accused, the accused was found pouring kerosene on the deceased and lighted with a match stick. As a result of which, the deceased received burn injuries on her face, abdomen and breast. Then PW.2 went and put off the flames with blanket. The other neighbours also gathered there and shifted the deceased to Government General Hospital, Kurnool in an Ambulance.
ii) On receipt of M.L.C. intimation, PW. 11 - the Assistant Sub-Inspector, Out-post Police Station, Kurnool, recorded the statement of the deceased under Ex.P13 and sent the same to the SHO, Nandikotkur Police Station on the point of jurisdiction. On the basis of said MLC intimation and statement of the deceased Exs.P13 and P14, PW. 13 - the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nandikotkur, registered a case in Crime No.51 of 2007 for the offence under section 307 I.P.C., issued FIR Ex.P16 and took up investigation. After receiving the death intimation, the section of law was altered to Section 302 IPC and fresh FIR Ex.P15 was issued.
iii) PW.15 – the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool, on receipt of requisition from the Government General Hospital, Kurnool, to record the dying declaration of the deceased, proceeded to the Hospital and after following the requisite procedure, he recorded the dying declaration of the deceased under Ex.P21. The deceased succumbed to the injuries.
iv) PW.10 - Dr. S.M. Basha, Tutor in the Department of Forensic Medicine, Kurnool Medical College, Kurnool, conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued his report stating that the deceased died due to burn injuries and its sequel. Ex.P11 is the post-mortem certificate issued by him.
v) PW. 14 – the Inspector of Police, Nandikotkur, on receipt of death inti
Dying declarations must be consistent and corroborated by independent evidence; inconsistencies can lead to reasonable doubt and acquittal.
Dying declarations, if consistent and credible, can support a conviction without corroboration, as established by the court.
Dying declarations can serve as the sole basis for conviction if they are consistent and credible; however, inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence can lead to reasonable doubt and acquitt....
Courts may rely on dying declarations for conviction if they are consistent and reliable; contradictions undermine their credibility, leading to acquittal.
Inconsistent dying declarations cannot support a conviction for murder under IPC Section 302.
Dying declaration – In cases where dying declaration is suspicious, it is not safe to convict accused in absence of corroborative evidence.
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on credible dying declarations, emphasizing that minor inconsistencies do not undermine their reliability.
Dying declarations can serve as the sole basis for conviction if found trustworthy; the accused must explain circumstances leading to the victim's death.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
