Back
2017 Supreme(Bom) 1807
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
Motiram S/o Manohar Phad & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.624 OF 2006
Decided On : 17-11-2017
For the Appellants :Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, Advocate for the appellants
For the Respondent: Mr. S.N. Morampalle, A.P.P.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of corroborating evidence, careful scrutiny of dying declarations, and the need to consider the voluntariness and genuineness of the statements in reaching a decision.
Headnote:
Dying Declaration - Conviction under IPC Sections 302 and 498-A - [IPC Sections 302, 498-A, 34] - The court discussed the dying declarations of the deceased Balika, highlighting the importance of corroborating evidence, the voluntariness and genuineness of the statement, and the need for careful scrutiny of dying declarations. The court ultimately accepted the dying declaration in favor of the appellants and discarded the incriminating dying declaration, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498-A of the IPC based on the allegation that they set the deceased Balika on fire. The deceased Balika's dying declarations formed the crux of the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dying declaration incriminating the appellants lacked corroboration and was not supported by the evidence of the deceased Balika's parents and other witnesses. The court concluded that the appellants were wrongly convicted and sentenced, leading to their acquittal.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the reliability and corroboration of the dying declarations, the voluntariness and genuineness of the statements, and the presence of corroborating evidence to support the prosecution's case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for corroborating evidence, careful scrutiny of dying declarations, and the importance of considering the voluntariness and genuineness of the statements. The court ultimately accepted the dying declaration in favor of the appellants and discarded the incriminating dying declaration.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the impugned judgment and order convicting and sentencing the appellants were quashed and set aside, and the appellants were acquitted of the offences. The bail bonds of the appellants were cancelled, and they were set at liberty. The fine amount deposited by the appellants was ordered to be refunded to them.
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.
1. The appellants have taken exception to the judgment and order dated 17th August, 2006, passed in Sessions Case No.97 of 2004 by the learned 1st Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Ambejogai, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”, for short).
2. Appellant No.1 is the husband, while appellant No.2 is the mother-in-law of the deceased namely Balika. The marriage of appellant No.1 and the deceased Balika was performed before about one year of the incident that took place on 12th May, 2004.
3. It is alleged that the deceased Balika did not conceive child even after one year of the marriage and therefore, the appellants started illtreating her. On 12th may, 2004 at about 6.00 p.m., the deceased Balika was taking out grains from a gunny bag for being grinded on the say of appellant No.2. Both the appellants closed the door of the house from inside, poured kerosene on her person and appellant No.1 set her on fire by means of a burning matchstick. The deceased Balika raised shouts and tried to run away. She sustained serious burn injuries. The appellants then tried to make a show of extinguishing fire from her person. One Surekha Namdeo Phad, Aasubai Laxman Phad and others rushed to the husband of the appellants. They extinguished the fire. The mother, cousin-brother-in-law and cousin-maternal uncle of the deceased Balika took her to the Civil Hospital at Ambejogai and admitted her there for treatment.
4. The statement of the deceased Balika was recorded by ASI Lambture on 13th may, 2004 at about 12.30 noon. It was treated as the FIR. On the basis thereof, crime No.73 of 2004 came to be registered against the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 498-A read with Section 34 of the IPC in Police Station (Rural), Parali.
5. The investigation followed. The spot panchanama was prepared on 14th May, 2004 at about 9.00 a.m. A kerosene lamp came to be seized from the spot of the incident. The Investigating Officer gave a letter to the Special Executive Magistrate to record the statement of the deceased Balika. Accordingly, the Special Executive Magistrate namely Savita Anurath Sagar recorded her statement on 14th May, 2004 at 10.30 a.m. The statements of the witnesses were recorded. Balika died on 17th May, 2004 at about 00.30 a.m. The offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC came to be substituted for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC. The inquest of the body of the deceased Balika was prepared. It was referred to the Medical Officer for postmortem. The Medical Officers conducted postmortem on the body of the deceased Balika on 18th May, 2004 and found 87% of burns on her body. They opined that she died due to shock due to burns. After completion of the investigation, the appellants came to be charge-sheeted for the above mentioned offences in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambejogai.
6. The case being exclusively triable by the Court of Session, the learned Magistrate committed it to the Additional Sessions Court at Ambejogai for trial. The learned Trial Judge framed charges against the appellants for the above mentioned offences vide Exh-26 and explained the contents thereof to them in vernacular. The appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Their defence is that of total denial and false implication. According to them, the deceased Balika sustained burns accidentally.
7. The prosecution examined seven witnesses to establish guilt of the appellants for the above mentioned offences. The learned Trial Judge evaluated the evidence of the prosecution and found the appellants guilty for the above mentioned offences. He, therefore, convicted them for the said offences and sentenced each of them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in respect of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the
