Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Cal) 35

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Debangsu Basak, Md. Shabbar Rashidi, JJ.
Pinky Khatoon @ Begum - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 164 of 2022, CRAN 1 of 2022
Decided On : 03-02-2023

Advocates appeared:
Tanmoy Chattopadhay, Advocate, Madhusudan Sur, Advocate, Dipankar Pramanick, Advocate

The court reiterated the principles laid down in Mehiboobsab Abbasabi Nadaf (2007) and Puran Chand (2010) regarding the evaluation of dying declarations. The court held that dying declarations must be voluntary, truthful, made in a conscious state of mind, and free from influence. The court also held that medical evidence and forensic science laboratory reports play a crucial role in determining the cause and manner of death.

Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302 INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 - DYING DECLARATION - RELIABILITY - MEDICAL EVIDENCE - FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY REPORT - BURDEN OF PROOF - BENEFIT OF DOUBT:
Fact of the Case:

The appellant challenged the judgment of conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, for intentionally causing the death of the victim by setting her on fire. The prosecution relied on dying declarations, medical evidence, and a forensic science laboratory report to establish the guilt of the appellant.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the dying declarations were contradictory and inconsistent with each other. The written dying declaration exonerated the appellant, while the statement recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code implicated the appellant. The medical evidence was inconclusive as to whether the injuries suffered by the victim were homicidal in nature. The forensic science laboratory report did not find any signs of fire on any other part of the room or splashing signs on the wall below the shelf where the victim was found.
Issues: 1. Whether the dying declarations were reliable and could be relied upon to convict the appellant. 2. Whether the medical evidence established that the injuries suffered by the victim were homicidal in nature. 3. Whether the forensic science laboratory report supported the prosecution's case.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the dying declarations were not reliable as they were contradictory and inconsistent with each other. 2. The court found that the medical evidence was inconclusive as to whether the injuries suffered by the victim were homicidal in nature. 3. The court held that the forensic science laboratory report did not support the prosecution's case as it did not find any signs of fire on any other part of the room or splashing signs on the wall below the shelf where the victim was found.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment of conviction and the order of sentence, and acquitted the appellant. The court held that the prosecution failed to establish the charge against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt and that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of the doubt.

JUDGMENT

Debangsu Basak, J. - The appellant has assailed the judgement of conviction dated July 15, 2022 and the order of sentence dated July 18, 2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, South 24 Parganas, Alipore in Sessions Trial No. 5 (8) 2014 arising out of Sessions Case No. 9 (6) 2014.

2. By the impugned judgement of conviction and the order of sentence, the learned judge has convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced the appellant to suffer imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000 in default of rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.

3. At the trial, the persecution had contended that, the appellant on July 31, 2010 at about 12:30 hours at premises no. 61, Alif Nagar, Kolkata - 700024 intentionally caused the death of the victim by setting her on fire. The trial Court had framed charges against the appellant on August 30, 2014 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

4. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant has contended that, the records of the case disclosed that there were 3 dying declarations of which 2 had been written down. He has referred to Exhibits 2 and 4 which according to him allegedly contains the dying declaration in the written form. He has referred to the testimony of PW 6. He has contended that, PW 6 has given a different version of the alleged dying declaration of the victim. In such conspectus, he has contended that, none of the dying declaration should be relied upon.

5. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant has submitted that, the incident happened on July 31, 2010. He has drawn the attention of the Court particularly to the time and the dates on which, Exhibit 4 and Exhibit 2 had been written down. He has contended that, there was sufficient time gap between the incident and the alleged dying declarations. Moreover, referring to the contradictions in the dying declarations, and relying upon 2007 volume 8 SCR 713 (Mehiboobsab Abbasabi Nadaf Vs. State of Karnataka) and 2010 volume 6 Supreme Court Cases 566 (Puran Chand Vs. State of Haryana) he has contended that, the learned trial Court erred in convicting the appellant.

6. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant has referred to the forensic science laboratory report being Exhibit 10. He has submitted that, the claim of the prosecution that, the appellant had poured kerosene oil over the victim and set her on fire, is belied by such report. No splashing of kerosene oil had been found on the wall of the place of occurrence. The victim had been sitting at the corner of the room. He has referred to the photographs which were tendered in evidence. He has submitted that, such photographs were taken after 8 PM on the date of the incident with a considerable time lapse from the time of the incident till the time when the photographs were taken.

7. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant has submitted that, the seizure list is suspect. The same had been made at 7 PM. It is inconceivable that such seizure was made on the date of the incident given the fact that the victim was at the hospital at that material point of time.

8. Learned advocate appearing for the state has submitted that, the dying declaration was robust and should be relied upon in order to find the guilt of the appellant. He has contended that, the Investigating Officer being PW 11 had recorded the dying declaration in presence of the Doctor being PW 2. He has referred to the oral testimony of PW 10. He has also relied upon the testimony of PW 6. He has submitted that, PW 6 also implicates the appellant.

9. At the trial, to bring home the charges, the prosecution had examined 12 witnesses and relied upon several documentary and material evidences. The police personnel who had taken the photographs of the place of occurrence had deposed as PW 1. He had tendered the photographs which he took, in evidence and the same were marked collectively as material Exhibit I.

10. The Doctor posted at the Plastic Surg