IMPORTANT POINT
It is open to the High Court on an appeal against an order of acquittal to review the entire evidence and to come to its own conclusion, of course, keeping in view the well-established rule that the presumption of innocence with which the accused person starts in the trial Court continues even up to the appellate stage and that the appellate court should attach due weight to the opinion of the trial Court which recorded the order of acquittal. Dying declaration can be made the sole basis of conviction of an accused provided the dying declaration is found to be true and voluntary and is not a result of tutoring or prompting or a product of imagination. The evidence of a witness cannot be ignored or thrown out solely because it comes from the mouth of a person who is closely related to the victim.

JUDGMENT

Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. —

1. In the present appeal, the appellant has challenged the legality of the judgment and order dated 04.09.2002 passed by the Madras High Court. The appellant is aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order as by the said judgment the High Court reversed the order of acquittal passed by the trial Court and convicted the prevent appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short “the IPC”) and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.

2. The appellant - Jayabalan and the deceased - Vasanthi, got married on 05.09.1988 and out of the aforesaid wedlock, two children were born. The couple was living just opposite to the house of the deceased’s parents, the two houses i.e. of the appellant and that of the deceased’s parents being separated by a 20 feet wide road. The deceased, at the time of her death, was employed as a nurse in the T. B. Hospital, Pondicherry and the appellant was employed as a teacher in Alankuppam Government School, Pondicherry. The relationship between the appellant and the deceased was stated to be strained. The appellant used to collect the salary of the deceased and also used to be very strict in allowing the deceased to spend her money. The appellant was also in the habit of suspecting the fidelity of the deceased whenever she would talk to a male person. On account of this, there used to be frequent quarrels between the couple. In July 1992, about two months prior to the date of the incident, the deceased is said to have complained to her parents that she apprehended threat to her life from the appellant. Just fifteen days prior to the date of the incident, there was a quarrel between the couple in connection with the ear piercing ceremony of their children. It has been alleged that while the appellant wanted to spend lavishly and celebrate the ear piercing ceremony along with the ear piercing ceremony of his brother’s children, the deceased did not agree to it, and on the contrary wanted the function to be as simple as possible without incurring much expenditure. The ear piercing ceremony was fixed for 01.06.1992.

3. On the fateful day of 29.05.1992, the deceased went to her parental house in the morning with her children and took her breakfast there and thereafter she came back to her own house leaving behind her child in her parental house. At about 9.10 a.m., when the baby started crying, the younger sister of the deceased, Chitra (PW-3) took the child and went to the house of the appellant and she left the child there after informing about the same to the deceased. At about 9.25 a.m., the brother of the deceased, Ravi Kumar (PW-1) and also the sisters (PW-3 and PW-4) of the deceased heard the screams of the deceased. On hearing the said screams they immediately pent to the house of the appellant and found the appellant jumping and coming out from the bathroom without any clothes on him. The appellant- having suffered bum injuries on his body requested PW -1 to call for an auto rickshaw. PW-l took the baby and handed him over to PW-3 and requested their neighbor Narayanan (PW-5) to fetch an auto rickshaw and when the auto rickshaw arrived, the appellant got into it along with one mango (PW- 6), who was asked to accompany the appellant to the hospital. The appellant along with PW -6 then proceeded to the Jawaharlal Nehru Institute of Medical Education and Research, Pondicherry where the appellant was attended to at 9.45 a.m. for the burn injuries sustained by him.

4. Immediately after the appellant and PW -6 left for the hospital, PW -1, PW-3, PW-4 as well as P\V-5, came inside the house of the appellant and on realising the screams of the deceased to be emanating from the bathroom, found the deceased to be burning inside the bathroom. As the bathroom door was bolted from inside and could not be opened, they broke open the door with a crow bar. They immediately covered the deceased with gunny bags and put off the fire. The deceased was stated to be